[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cc667d1a-3c8e-4481-980d-20efe0faeced.liu.xiang@zlingsmart.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 10:32:49 +0800
From: "liu xiang" <liu.xiang@...ngsmart.com>
To: "Maxime Ripard" <maxime@...no.tech>,
"Linus Walleij" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Cc: "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM"
<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, "Chen-Yu Tsai" <wens@...e.org>,
"Jernej Skrabec" <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
"Linux ARM" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"liuxiang_1999" <liuxiang_1999@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: sunxi: fix use-after-free in sunxi_pmx_free()
------------------------------------------------------------------
> On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 5:40 PM Maxime Ripard <maxime@...no.tech> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 02:29:08PM +0800, Liu Xiang wrote:
> > When CONFIG_REGULATOR is not set, sunxi_pmx_request() always return
> > success. Even a group of pins call sunxi_pmx_request(), the refcount
> > is only 1. This can cause a use-after-free warning in sunxi_pmx_free().
> > To solve this problem, go to err path if regulator_get() return NULL
> > or error.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Liu Xiang <liu.xiang@...ngsmart.com>
>
> Is there any drawback to depending on CONFIG_REGULATOR?
>
> Given that we need those regulators enabled anyway, I guess we could
> just select or depends on it
>
> I agree.
>
> Liu can you make a patch to Kconfig to just select REGULATOR?
> Possibly even the specific regulator driver this SoC is using
> if it is very specific for this purpose.
>
> Yours,
> Linus Walleij
Sure. I will send a new patch.
Yours,
Liu Xiang
Powered by blists - more mailing lists