linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] bcm2048: Fix checkpatch checks

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:   Mon, 27 Feb 2017 09:21:31 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Man Choy <manchoyy@...il.com>
Cc:     bhumirks@...il.com, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bcm2048: Fix checkpatch checks

On Sat, Feb 18, 2017 at 11:52:37AM +0800, Man Choy wrote:
> Fix following checks:
> 
> CHECK: Avoid crashing the kernel - try using WARN_ON & recovery code rather than BUG() or BUG_ON()
> +       BUG_ON((index+2) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);
> 
> CHECK: spaces preferred around that '+' (ctx:VxV)
> +       BUG_ON((index+2) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);
>                      ^
> 
> CHECK: Avoid crashing the kernel - try using WARN_ON & recovery code rather than BUG() or BUG_ON()
> +       BUG_ON((index+4) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);
> 
> CHECK: spaces preferred around that '+' (ctx:VxV)
> +       BUG_ON((index+4) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);
>                      ^
> ---
>  drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c b/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
> index 37bd439..d5ee279 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/bcm2048/radio-bcm2048.c
> @@ -1534,7 +1534,7 @@ static int bcm2048_parse_rt_match_c(struct bcm2048_device *bdev, int i,
>  	if (crc == BCM2048_RDS_CRC_UNRECOVARABLE)
>  		return 0;
>  
> -	BUG_ON((index+2) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);
> +	WARN_ON((index + 2) >= BCM2048_MAX_RDS_RT);

Ick, no to all of these!  What happens if this is true, the code will
crash, right?  You have to properly recover from this, don't just throw
the message out to userspace and then keep on going.

You can't just do a search/replace for this, otherwise it would have
been done already :)

thanks,

greg k-h