linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/196] 5.15.25-rc1 review

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]

Date:   Mon, 21 Feb 2022 23:28:05 +0100
From:   Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, shuah@...nel.org, patches@...nelci.org,
        lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org, pavel@...x.de, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        f.fainelli@...il.com, sudipm.mukherjee@...il.com,
        slade@...dewatkins.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 000/196] 5.15.25-rc1 review

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 7:00 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 09:15:52AM -0800, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > On 2/21/22 00:47, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > > This is the start of the stable review cycle for the 5.15.25 release.
> > > There are 196 patches in this series, all will be posted as a response
> > > to this one.  If anyone has any issues with these being applied, please
> > > let me know.
> > >
> > > Responses should be made by Wed, 23 Feb 2022 08:48:58 +0000.
> > > Anything received after that time might be too late.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Building arm:allmodconfig ... failed
> > Building arm64:allmodconfig ... failed
> > --------------
> > Error log:
> > drivers/tee/optee/core.c: In function 'optee_probe':
> > drivers/tee/optee/core.c:726:20: error: operation on 'rc' may be undefined
>
>
> Jens, did you build the 5.15 patch you sent?

I did, but it seems I wasn't paying close enough attention to warnings.

>
> This line looks a bit odd:
>
> +               rc = rc = PTR_ERR(ctx);
>
> And given that rc is an int, that is not guaranteed to hold a pointer
> here :(

I'm sorry it looks like I've slipped on the keyboard. There is one "rc
= " too many.
I believe the assignment "rc = PTR_ERR(ctx)" is correct when
IS_ERR(ctx) is true. If I'm wrong I have a bigger problem.

I'll send a v2 to fix this. I see that I've copied the error to
backports for 5.10, 5.4 too so I'll send v2s for those too.

Thanks,
Jens

>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h