linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] sh: mm: Fix unprotected access to struct device

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:   Fri, 20 Apr 2018 01:30:32 -0700
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:     Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>
Cc:     Jacopo Mondi <jacopo+renesas@...ndi.org>,
        ysato@...rs.sourceforge.jp, dalias@...c.org,
        thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com, robin.murphy@....com,
        geert@...ux-m68k.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-sh@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sh: mm: Fix unprotected access to struct device

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 03:54:07PM +0200, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> 
>   dma_alloc_coherent(&pdev->dev, memsize, &dma_handle, GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> and one to switch to the WARN_ON + if(dev) model. But I don't really
> care either way, so:
> 
> Reviewed-by: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...tlin.com>

Yes, these should be separate patches.  And I actually hope we can
do with the NULL dev check, but that is a different sub-thread.