[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180508121635.mdw4jikv66iyprie@mwanda>
Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 15:16:35 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To: Wenwen Wang <wang6495@....edu>
Cc: "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
"open list:STAGING - ATOMISP DRIVER" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Hans Verkuil <hans.verkuil@...co.com>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
Alan Cox <alan@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: staging: atomisp: fix a potential missing-check
bug
On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 05:38:49PM -0500, Wenwen Wang wrote:
> At the end of atomisp_subdev_set_selection(), the function
> atomisp_subdev_get_rect() is invoked to get the pointer to v4l2_rect. Since
> this function may return a NULL pointer, it is firstly invoked to check
> the returned pointer. If the returned pointer is not NULL, then the
> function is invoked again to obtain the pointer and the memory content
> at the location of the returned pointer is copied to the memory location of
> r. In most cases, the pointers returned by the two invocations are same.
> However, given that the pointer returned by the function
> atomisp_subdev_get_rect() is not a constant, it is possible that the two
> invocations return two different pointers. For example, another thread may
> race to modify the related pointers during the two invocations.
You're assuming a very serious race condition exists.
> In that
> case, even if the first returned pointer is not null, the second returned
> pointer might be null, which will cause issues such as null pointer
> dereference.
And then complaining that if a really serious bug exists then this very
minor bug would exist too... If there were really a race condition like
that then we'd want to fix it instead. In other words, this is not a
real life bug fix.
But it would be fine as a readability or static checker fix so that's
fine.
regards,
dan carpenter
Powered by blists - more mailing lists