[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHp75Ve6h-rb+zz15mRB_1sDiLXxppKWfu2W9sVsnsL5ZUvucQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2017 19:21:36 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu@...aro.org>,
Jassi Brar <jaswinder.singh@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [BUGFIX] gpio: reject invalid gpio before getting gpio_desc
On Sat, Jul 29, 2017 at 11:00 AM, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org> wrote:
> Check user-given gpio number and reject it before
> calling gpio_to_desc() because gpio_to_desc() is
> for kernel driver and it expects given gpio number
> is valid (means 0 to 511).
> If given number is invalid, gpio_to_desc() calls
> WARN() and dump registers and stack for debug.
> This means user can easily kick WARN() just by
> writing invalid gpio number (e.g. 512) to
> /sys/class/gpio/export.
> This bug has been introduced by commit 0e9a5edf5d01
> ("gpio: fix deferred probe detection for legacy API")
Why so narrow paraghraps? We don't do two column articles :-)
> Signed-off-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
> Fixes: commit 0e9a5edf5d01 ("gpio: fix deferred probe detection for legacy API")
If you use git tools directly, like
% git commit -s --amend
you will immediately notice that your SoB line is supposed to be the last one.
Besides above, word "commit" is not needed in Fixes: tag IIRC.
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-sysfs.c
> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
> #include <linux/mutex.h>
> #include <linux/device.h>
> #include <linux/sysfs.h>
> +#include <linux/gpio.h>
> #include <linux/gpio/consumer.h>
> #include <linux/gpio/driver.h>
> #include <linux/interrupt.h>
> @@ -443,14 +444,16 @@ static ssize_t export_store(struct class *class,
> - struct gpio_desc *desc;
> + struct gpio_desc *desc = NULL;
> - desc = gpio_to_desc(gpio);
> + if (gpio_is_valid(gpio))
> + desc = gpio_to_desc(gpio);
Twice repeatition is a candidate for a helper, like:
static inline struct gpio_desc *gpio_to_valid_desc(int gpio)
{
return gpio_is_valid(gpio) ? gpio_to_desc(gpio) : NULL;
}
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists