linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] codecs: rt5682: fix an incorrect NULL check on list iterator

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <164915107801.276574.16249779388452959492.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 05 Apr 2022 10:31:18 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     xiam0nd.tong@...il.com, oder_chiou@...ltek.com,
        lgirdwood@...il.com, tiwai@...e.com, perex@...ex.cz
Cc:     derek.fang@...ltek.com, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        alsa-devel@...a-project.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] codecs: rt5682: fix an incorrect NULL check on list iterator

On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 16:10:02 +0800, Xiaomeng Tong wrote:
> The bug is here:
> 	if (!dai) {
> 
> The list iterator value 'dai' will *always* be set and non-NULL
> by for_each_component_dais(), so it is incorrect to assume that
> the iterator value will be NULL if the list is empty or no element
> is found (In fact, it will be a bogus pointer to an invalid struct
> object containing the HEAD). Otherwise it will bypass the check
> 'if (!dai) {' (never call dev_err() and never return -ENODEV;)
> and lead to invalid memory access lately when calling
> 'rt5682_set_bclk1_ratio(dai, factor);'.
> 
> [...]

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] codecs: rt5682: fix an incorrect NULL check on list iterator
      commit: c8618d65007ba68d7891130642d73e89372101e8

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark