linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] regulator: qcom

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:   Thu, 20 Jun 2019 10:13:52 -0700
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>
Cc:     lgirdwood@...il.com, broonie@...nel.org,
        jorge.ramirez-ortiz@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] regulator: qcom_spmi: Do NULL check for lvs

On Thu 20 Jun 07:22 PDT 2019, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:

> Low-voltage switches (lvs) don't have set_points since the voltage ranges
> of the output are really controlled by the inputs.  This is a problem for
> the newly added linear range support in the probe(), as that will cause
> a null pointer dereference error on older platforms like msm8974 which
> happen to need to control some of the implemented lvs.
> 
> Fix this by adding the appropriate null check.
> 

Thanks Jeff, this resolves the regression I've seen the last couple of
days on linux-next.

Tested-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>

Regards,
Bjorn

> Fixes: 86f4ff7a0c0c ("regulator: qcom_spmi: enable linear range info")
> Reported-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jeffrey.l.hugo@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/regulator/qcom_spmi-regulator.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/regulator/qcom_spmi-regulator.c b/drivers/regulator/qcom_spmi-regulator.c
> index 877df33e0246..7f51c5fc8194 100644
> --- a/drivers/regulator/qcom_spmi-regulator.c
> +++ b/drivers/regulator/qcom_spmi-regulator.c
> @@ -2045,7 +2045,7 @@ static int qcom_spmi_regulator_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  			}
>  		}
>  
> -		if (vreg->set_points->count == 1) {
> +		if (vreg->set_points && vreg->set_points->count == 1) {
>  			/* since there is only one range */
>  			range = vreg->set_points->range;
>  			vreg->desc.uV_step = range->step_uV;
> -- 
> 2.17.1
>