linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] staging: r8188eu: check the return of kzalloc()

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:   Wed, 6 Apr 2022 22:22:19 +0300
From:   Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>
To:     xkernel.wang@...mail.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 v2 2/2] staging: r8188eu: check the return of kzalloc()

Hi Xkernel,

On 4/6/22 07:30, xkernel.wang@...mail.com wrote:
> From: Xiaoke Wang <xkernel.wang@...mail.com>
> 
> kzalloc() is a memory allocation function which can return NULL when
> some internal memory errors happen. So it is better to handle the return
> of it to prevent potential wrong memory access.
> 
> Besides, to propagate the error to the caller, the type of
> rtw_alloc_hwxmits() is changed and another check is added in its caller.
> Then if kzalloc() fails, the caller will properly jump to the
> corresponding error hanlding code.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xiaoke Wang <xkernel.wang@...mail.com>
> ---
> ChangeLog:
> v1->v2 update the description and adjust the sequence of patches.
>   drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c    | 10 ++++++++--
>   drivers/staging/r8188eu/include/rtw_xmit.h |  2 +-
>   2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
> index 865b2fc..92a1ad3 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/r8188eu/core/rtw_xmit.c
> @@ -176,7 +176,9 @@ s32	_rtw_init_xmit_priv(struct xmit_priv *pxmitpriv, struct adapter *padapter)
>   
>   	pxmitpriv->free_xmit_extbuf_cnt = num_xmit_extbuf;
>   
> -	rtw_alloc_hwxmits(padapter);
> +	res = rtw_alloc_hwxmits(padapter);
> +	if (res == _FAIL)
> +		goto free_xmit_extbuf;
>   	rtw_init_hwxmits(pxmitpriv->hwxmits, pxmitpriv->hwxmit_entry);
>   
>   	for (i = 0; i < 4; i++)
> @@ -1490,7 +1492,7 @@ s32 rtw_xmit_classifier(struct adapter *padapter, struct xmit_frame *pxmitframe)
>   	return res;
>   }
>   
> -void rtw_alloc_hwxmits(struct adapter *padapter)
> +s32 rtw_alloc_hwxmits(struct adapter *padapter)
>   {

What about plain 'int'? I know that s32 is typedef for 'int', but 'int' 
looks more natural

just my 2c,


With regards,
Pavel Skripkin