[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b2642624-f7d9-3e50-1880-1115988343a8@163.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2021 22:26:06 +0800
From: Alex <alex_luca@....com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Zhang Kun <zhangkun@...rlc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: renesas:fix possible null pointer dereference
struct pinmux_range *
On 2/9/21 10:12 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> Thanks for your patch!
>
> On Sun, Feb 7, 2021 at 4:08 PM <alex_luca@....com> wrote:
>> From: Zhang Kun <zhangkun@...rlc.com>
>>
>> The parameters of sh_pfc_enum_in_range() pinmux_range *r should be checked
>> first for possible null ponter, especially when PINMUX_TYPE_FUNCTION as the
>> pinmux_type was passed by sh_pfc_config_mux().
>
> If pinmux_type in sh_pfc_config_mux() is PINMUX_TYPE_FUNCTION or
> PINMUX_TYPE_GPIO, range is indeed NULL.
> But as the call
>
> in_range = sh_pfc_enum_in_range(enum_id, range);
>
> is not done in case of these pinmux types, I don't see where the
> problem is. What am I missing?
>
Oh, you are right. I think I know what I missed.
Thank you.
Alex
Powered by blists - more mailing lists