linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: cdev: fix null pointer dereference in linereq

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]

Message-ID: <424af43a-bcaf-4f59-086d-b1afea425054@nvidia.com>
Date:   Fri, 8 Jul 2022 11:24:43 -0700
From:   Dipen Patel <dipenp@...dia.com>
To:     Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: cdev: fix null pointer dereference in
 linereq_free()

On 7/7/22 3:29 AM, Kent Gibson wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 07, 2022 at 12:19:15PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
>> On Thu, Jul 7, 2022 at 11:00 AM Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 04:50:25PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 04:45:07PM +0800, Kent Gibson wrote:
>>>>> This patch fixes a kernel NULL pointer dereference that is reported by
>>>>> gpio kselftests.
>>>>>
>>>> Should be:
>>>>
>>>> Fix a kernel NULL pointer dereference reported by gpio kselftests.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry - I rushed this one a bit.
>>>>
>>> And I might not've been totally clear, but this bug is present in
>>> v5.19-rc1 onwards (when HTE was added), up to and including rc5.
>>>
>>> Would be good to get it fixed before v5.19 goes out the door.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Kent.
>> Yep, figured that out. Applied and fixed the commit message, thanks!
>>
> Good to hear.  I never got around to reviewing that final HTE patch
> and, while it did end up pretty close to what I expected, there are a
> few things that I would've done slightly differently that I'd like to
> tidy up.
I can create another thread to address this. Let me know.
> And also have the HTE specific code compiled out unless CONFIG_HTE is
> selected, as that is very likely to be the case for most builds.
> But that can wait for v5.20.

I am assuming #ifdef CONFIG_HTE blocks around HTE blocks. I think Linus W. also

indicated that.

>
> Cheers,
> Kent.
>