linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: bcm-sba-raid: Handle mbox_request

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 10 Jan 2019 09:36:26 -0800
From:   Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>
To:     Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@...adcom.com>,
        Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>
Cc:     Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>, dmaengine@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] dmaengine: bcm-sba-raid: Handle mbox_request_channel
 failure



On 1/9/2019 10:07 PM, Rayagonda Kokatanur wrote:
> Fix kernel NULL pointer dereference error when mbox_request_channel()
> fails to allocate channel.
> 
> Fixes: 4e9f8187aecb ("dmaengine: bcm-sba-raid: Use only single mailbox channel")
> Signed-off-by: Rayagonda Kokatanur <rayagonda.kokatanur@...adcom.com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma/bcm-sba-raid.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/bcm-sba-raid.c b/drivers/dma/bcm-sba-raid.c
> index 72878ac5c78d..77ae74663a45 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/bcm-sba-raid.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/bcm-sba-raid.c
> @@ -1690,7 +1690,7 @@ static int sba_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	sba->mchan = mbox_request_channel(&sba->client, 0);
>  	if (IS_ERR(sba->mchan)) {
>  		ret = PTR_ERR(sba->mchan);
> -		goto fail_free_mchan;
> +		goto fail_exit;
>  	}
>  
>  	/* Find-out underlying mailbox device */
> @@ -1747,6 +1747,7 @@ static int sba_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	sba_freeup_channel_resources(sba);
>  fail_free_mchan:
>  	mbox_free_channel(sba->mchan);
> +fail_exit:
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> 

Looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>