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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 25 May 2019 10:36:08 +0800 From: Gen Zhang <blackgod016574@...il.com> To: Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org> Cc: Darren Hart <dvhart@...radead.org>, linux-efi <linux-efi@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] efi_64: Fix a missing-check bug in arch/x86/platform/efi/efi_64.c On Fri, May 24, 2019 at 06:07:10PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > Apologies for only spotting this now, but I seem to have given some bad advice. > > efi_call_phys_prolog() in efi_64.c will also return NULL if > (!efi_enabled(EFI_OLD_MEMMAP)), but this is not an error condition. So > that occurrence has to be updated: please return efi_mm.pgd instead. Thanks for your reply, Ard. You mean that we should return efi_mm.pgd when allcoation fails? And we should delete return EFI_ABORTED on the caller site, right? In that case, how should we handle the NULL pointer returned by condition if(!efi_enabled(EFI_OLD_MEMMAP)) on the caller site? Thanks Gen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists