linux-kernel - Re: Misuses of ** ? (was Re: [PATCH 1/1] ASoC: Intel: Atom: add a missing star in a memcpy call)

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

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.10.1608282338290.3419@hadrien>
Date:   Sun, 28 Aug 2016 23:40:07 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
cc:     Nicolas Iooss <nicolas.iooss_linux@....org>,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, Dan Capenter <error27@...il.com>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Misuses of ** ? (was Re: [PATCH 1/1] ASoC: Intel: Atom: add a
 missing star in a memcpy call)



On Sun, 28 Aug 2016, Joe Perches wrote:

> On Sun, 2016-08-28 at 21:38 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > On Sun, 28 Aug 2016, Nicolas Iooss wrote:
> > > On 28/08/16 19:50, Joe Perches wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2016-08-28 at 19:39 +0200, Nicolas Iooss wrote:
> > > >> In sst_prepare_and_post_msg(), when a response is received in "block",
> > > >> the following code gets executed:
> > > >>
> > > >>     *data = kzalloc(block->size, GFP_KERNEL);
> > > >>     memcpy(data, (void *) block->data, block->size);
> > > >
> > > > Yuck, thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Julia, Dan, could cocci or smatch help find any other
> > > > similar misuses here?
> []
> > I tried the following semantic patch, that is quite general, and the fixed
> > issue was the only report.
> >
> > @@
> > expression x,y,sz;
> > identifier f,g;
> > @@
> >
> > * *x = f(sz,...);
> >   ...
> > * g(x,y,sz);
>
> Hi Julia,
>
> This would find exactly the same form, but I think
> the question is are there assignments of a **pp
> that should have been *pp
>
> Something like:
>
> @@
> type P;
> P **pp;
> @@
>
> * pp = <alloc>\|<copy>\|<access>(..., sizeof(P), ...)

I didn't get anything for this.  Did you mean for the left hand side of
the assignment to be pp or *pp?  Is the issue that the type is wrong?

julia