[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1433483211.2658.22.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jun 2015 22:46:51 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Sudip Mukherjee <sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com>
Cc: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
Noralf Trønnes <noralf@...nnes.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] staging: fbtft: fix out of bound access
On Fri, 2015-06-05 at 10:22 +0530, Sudip Mukherjee wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 01:48:31PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
[]
> ccing you just slipped out of my mind.
No worries.
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c b/drivers/staging/fbtft/fbtft-core.c
> > []
> > > @@ -1067,8 +1067,6 @@ static int fbtft_init_display_dt(struct fbtft_par *par)
> > > const __be32 *p;
> > > u32 val;
> > > int buf[64], i, j;
> > []
> > > par->fbtftops.write_register(par, i,
> > > buf[0], buf[1], buf[2], buf[3],
> >
> > It seems there are only 2 callers of (*write_register)()
> > and the arguments are always an in-order array int[64]
> >
> > Maybe it'd be nicer to change the prototypes of the
> > write_register functions to take a const int *
> > instead of pushing 64 ints on the stack.
> yes, I will send it as a separate patch as that is another change.
I looked at it a bit more and there's a macro that calls
write_register so there are actually many more call sites.
It's a bit non trivial to change the macro as all the
called (*write_register) functions would need changing
and these functions use va_list.
Maybe if you _really_ feel like it, but it's a bit of work.
--
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