linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] media: meson: Add NULL check after the call to kmalloc()

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]

Message-ID: <20190904084525.GB4925@kroah.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Sep 2019 10:45:25 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Austin Kim <austindh.kim@...il.com>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, khilman@...libre.com, mjourdan@...libre.com,
        devel@...verdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: meson: Add NULL check after the call to kmalloc()

On Wed, Sep 04, 2019 at 05:22:32PM +0900, Austin Kim wrote:
> If the kmalloc() return NULL, the NULL pointer dereference will occur.
> 	new_ts->ts = ts;
> 
> Add exception check after the call to kmalloc() is made.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Austin Kim <austindh.kim@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec_helpers.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec_helpers.c b/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec_helpers.c
> index f16948b..e7e56d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec_helpers.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/media/meson/vdec/vdec_helpers.c
> @@ -206,6 +206,10 @@ void amvdec_add_ts_reorder(struct amvdec_session *sess, u64 ts, u32 offset)
>  	unsigned long flags;
>  
>  	new_ts = kmalloc(sizeof(*new_ts), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!new_ts) {
> +		dev_err(sess->core->dev, "Failed to kmalloc()\n");

Did you run this through checkpatch?  I think it will say that this line
is not ok.

> +		return;

Shouldn't you return an -ENOMEM error somehow?

thanks,

greg k-h