[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <71774617-79f9-1365-4267-a15a47422d10@web.de>
Date:   Sat, 12 Oct 2019 19:26:24 +0200
From:   Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To:     linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linuxwifi@...el.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Emmanuel Grumbach <emmanuel.grumbach@...el.com>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@...el.com>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Luca Coelho <luciano.coelho@...el.com>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>,
        Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>, Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>,
        Stephen McCamant <smccaman@....edu>
Subject: iwlwifi: Checking a kmemdup() call in iwl_req_fw_callback()
Hello,
I tried another script for the semantic patch language out.
This source code analysis approach points out that the implementation
of the function “iwl_req_fw_callback” contains still an unchecked call
of the function “kmemdup”.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-drv.c?id=1c0cc5f1ae5ee5a6913704c0d75a6e99604ee30a#n1454
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc2/source/drivers/net/wireless/intel/iwlwifi/iwl-drv.c#L1454
Can it be that just an other data structure member should be used
for the desired null pointer check at this place?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
 
