linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in acpi_processor

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 31 May 2013 07:25:42 +0900
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>
Cc:	Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>,
	Martin Mokrejs <mmokrejs@...d.natur.cuni.cz>,
	linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	patches@...aro.org, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in
 acpi_processor_add()

On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:57:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:29:54 AM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > On 2013-5-29 19:07, Martin Mokrejs wrote:
> > > Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > >> On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > >>> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote:
> > >>>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes,
> > >>>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@...aro.org>
> > >>>
> > >>> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11
> > >>> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
> > >>
> > >> Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
> > > 
> > > But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4
> > > and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable
> > > series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
> > 
> > Hi Rafeal,
> > 
> > What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
> 
> Well, this is kind of hard to say.  We generally don't apply patches to -stable
> that don't have mainline counterparts.
> 
> Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?

We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless
there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code,
and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there.

thanks,

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/