linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: Initialize pinctrl

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]

Date:   Thu, 12 Jan 2017 20:13:39 +0000
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
CC:     <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: Initialize pinctrl_dev.node



On 12/01/17 16:03, Thierry Reding wrote:
> From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
> 
> The struct pinctrl_dev's node field is not properly set up, which means
> the .prev and .next fields will be NULL. That's not something that the
> linked list code can deal with, so extra care must be taken when using
> these fields. An example of this is introduced in commit 3429fb3cda34
> ("pinctrl: Fix panic when pinctrl devices with hogs are unregistered")
> where list_del() is made conditional on the pinctrl device being part
> of the pinctrl device list. This is to ensure that list_del() won't
> crash upon encountering a NULL pointer in .prev and/or .next.
> 
> After initializing the list head there's no need to jump through these
> extra hoops and list_del() will work unconditionally. This is because
> the initialized list head points to itself and therefore the .prev and
> .next fields can be properly dereferenced.
> 
> Cc: Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>

Thanks for catching this.

Acked-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Tested-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>

Cheers
Jon

-- 
nvpublic