[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a39a4ba7-809d-a4af-6547-473978749451@ti.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2017 09:05:13 +0300
From: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
To: Colin King <colin.king@...onical.com>,
Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-clk@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][next] clk: ti: check for null return in strrchr to avoid
null dereferencing
On 27/07/17 02:56, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
>
> strrchr can potentially return a null so the following strlen on the
> null pointer can cause a null dereference. Add a check to see if
> the string postfix is not null before calling strlen.
>
> Detected by CoverityScan, CID#1452039 ("Dereference null return")
>
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@...onical.com>
> ---
> drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c b/drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c
> index 255cafb18336..bd7cb9a413c9 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/ti/adpll.c
> @@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ static int ti_adpll_setup_clock(struct ti_adpll_data *d, struct clk *clock,
>
> /* Separate con_id in format "pll040dcoclkldo" to fit MAX_CON_ID */
> postfix = strrchr(name, '.');
> - if (strlen(postfix) > 1) {
> + if (postfix && strlen(postfix) > 1) {
> if (strlen(postfix) > ADPLL_MAX_CON_ID)
> dev_warn(d->dev, "clock %s con_id lookup may fail\n",
> name);
>
Looks fine to me.
Acked-by: Tero Kristo <t-kristo@...com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists