lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 02 Jan 2013 02:44:38 +0400
From:	Alexey Khoroshilov <>
To:	Christian Lamparter <>
CC:	"John W. Linville" <>,,,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] p54pci: don't return zero on failure path in p54p_probe()

On 01/02/2013 01:45 AM, Christian Lamparter wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 January 2013 22:11:01 Alexey Khoroshilov wrote:
>> If pci_set_dma_mask() or pci_set_consistent_dma_mask() fails in p54p_probe(),
>> it breaks off initialization, deallocates all resources, but returns zero.
>> The patch implements proper error code propagation.
> Uh, Thanks!
> But wait, I think there's another return 0 in the error
> path. See p54pci.c @ line 558:
> mem_len = pci_resource_len(pdev, 0);
> if (mem_len < sizeof(...)) {
> 	dev_err(...)
> 	goto err_disabled_dev;
> }
> Do you think you can add a err = -EINVAL; before the goto too?
You are right! But I would say -ENODEV is more popular error code in 
this case.
> [I wonder why this wasn't found by the verification project as
> well? Could it be that pci_resource_len(...) < sizeof(...) is
> somehow always true and this is a dead branch?]
Actually it was found, but I have no direct access to the results at the 
moment. My fault.

Would you like I resend the patch to fix both?

Best regards,

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists