linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.13 24/52] libnvdimm, btt: check memory allocation failure

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: <20170918090907.591246907@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Mon, 18 Sep 2017 11:09:52 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
        Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>,
        Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.13 24/52] libnvdimm, btt: check memory allocation failure

4.13-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Christophe Jaillet <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>

commit ed36b4dba54a421ce5551638f6a9790b2c2116b1 upstream.

Check memory allocation failures and return -ENOMEM in such cases, as
already done few lines below for another memory allocation.

This avoids NULL pointers dereference.

Fixes: 14e494542636 ("libnvdimm, btt: BTT updates for UEFI 2.7 format")
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Reviewed-by: Vishal Verma <vishal.l.verma@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/nvdimm/btt.c |    2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

--- a/drivers/nvdimm/btt.c
+++ b/drivers/nvdimm/btt.c
@@ -1429,6 +1429,8 @@ int nvdimm_namespace_attach_btt(struct n
 	}
 
 	btt_sb = devm_kzalloc(&nd_btt->dev, sizeof(*btt_sb), GFP_KERNEL);
+	if (!btt_sb)
+		return -ENOMEM;
 
 	/*
 	 * If this returns < 0, that is ok as it just means there wasn't