[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3198340.cKCt9ZmSgp@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 12:01:46 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: RUC_SoftSec <rucsoftsec@...il.com>
Cc: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] acpi: check return value of acpi_os_map_memory
On Monday, October 28, 2013 02:04:19 PM RUC_SoftSec wrote:
> Function acpi_os_map_memory() may return a NULL pointer, it should be validated non-NULL before used.
> This bug is found by a static tool developed by RUC_SoftSec, supported by China.X.Orion.
>
> Signed-off-by: RUC_SoftSec <rucsoftsec@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/osl.c | 2 ++
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/osl.c b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> index e5f416c..bf8f93f 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/osl.c
> @@ -717,6 +717,8 @@ acpi_os_physical_table_override(struct acpi_table_header *existing_table,
>
> table = acpi_os_map_memory(acpi_tables_addr + table_offset,
> ACPI_HEADER_SIZE);
> + if (table == NULL)
"if (!table)" perhaps?
> + return AE_OK;
And why is it a good idea to return success then?
>
> if (table_offset + table->length > all_tables_size) {
> acpi_os_unmap_memory(table, ACPI_HEADER_SIZE);
>
Thanks!
--
I speak only for myself.
Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists