linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 12/12] staging: r8188eu: hal_data

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sun, 5 Dec 2021 16:22:48 +0100
From:   Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>
To:     Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc:     Larry.Finger@...inger.net, phil@...lpotter.co.uk,
        linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/12] staging: r8188eu: hal_data_sz is set but never used



On 12/5/21 15:42, Pavel Skripkin wrote:
> On 12/5/21 16:59, Michael Straube wrote:
>> hal_data_sz in struct adapter is set but never used. Remove it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c   | 1 -
>>   drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/drv_types.h | 1 -
>>   2 files changed, 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c 
>> b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c
>> index 641aaf299109..da966538596f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c
>> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/hal/usb_halinit.c
>> @@ -1969,5 +1969,4 @@ void rtl8188eu_alloc_haldata(struct adapter *adapt)
>>       adapt->HalData = kzalloc(sizeof(struct hal_data_8188e), 
>> GFP_KERNEL);
>>       if (!adapt->HalData)
>>           DBG_88E("cant not alloc memory for HAL DATA\n");
>> -    adapt->hal_data_sz = sizeof(struct hal_data_8188e);
>>   }
> 
> Not related to your patch, but not returning an error from this function 
>   looks very dangerous to me.
> 
> adapt->HalData is used in GET_HAL_DATA() macro all across the driver 
> code and nobody checks if it valid or not. If allocation fails here, 
> than we will likely hit GPF while accessing hal_data fields.
> 
> Maybe we can embed struct hal_data_8188e instead of storing a pointer to 
> it?

Rethinking my prevoius answer, embedding struct hal_data_8188e is the
better solution I think.

Regards,
Michael