linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 29/38] Input: touchscreen: atmel: remove invalid check

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20150921171041.GI17389@dtor-ws>
Date:	Mon, 21 Sep 2015 10:10:41 -0700
From:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
To:	Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Nick Dyer <nick.dyer@...ev.co.uk>, linux-input@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 29/38] Input: touchscreen: atmel: remove invalid check

Hi Andrzej,

On Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 03:34:01PM +0200, Andrzej Hajda wrote:
> byte_offset is unsigned.
> 
> The problem has been detected using proposed semantic patch
> scripts/coccinelle/tests/unsigned_lesser_than_zero.cocci [1].
> 
> [1]: http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2038576
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>
> ---
>  drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> index c562205..c577f95 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/atmel_mxt_ts.c
> @@ -1267,7 +1267,7 @@ static int mxt_prepare_cfg_mem(struct mxt_data *data,
>  
>  			byte_offset = reg + i - cfg_start_ofs;
>  
> -			if (byte_offset >= 0 && byte_offset < config_mem_size) {
> +			if (byte_offset < config_mem_size) {

I'd rather we kept the check as is: it documents the expected range even
if one of the checks is always true. If you search the archives you'll
find Linus has also pretty strong opinion about these checks actually
being useful from documenting POV.


>  				*(config_mem + byte_offset) = val;
>  			} else {
>  				dev_err(dev, "Bad object: reg:%d, T%d, ofs=%d\n",
> -- 
> 1.9.1
> 

Thanks.

-- 
Dmitry
--
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/