[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y2yUkxeBEF40olMD@bombadil.infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 22:05:07 -0800
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Miaoqian Lin <linmq006@...il.com>
Cc: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] module: Fix NULL vs IS_ERR checking for
module_get_next_page
On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 12:18:50PM +0800, Miaoqian Lin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 2022/11/10 12:09, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 10, 2022 at 06:58:34AM +0400, Miaoqian Lin wrote:
> >> The module_get_next_page() function return error pointers on error
> >> instead of NULL.
> >> Use IS_ERR() to check the return value to fix this.
> >>
> >> Fixes: b1ae6dc41eaa ("module: add in-kernel support for decompressing")
> >> Signed-off-by: Miaoqian Lin <linmq006@...il.com>
> >> ---
> > Thanks queued up. How did you find out? Just code inspection? I see
> > chances are low of this triggering, but just curious how you found it.
> I found this by static analysis, specifically, I obtained functions that return error pointers and
> inspected whether their callers followed the correct specification.
Which one did you use?
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists