linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] platform/x86: wmi: Check if event data is not NULL

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: <954e9d5e-4800-aba9-4678-44584baaea05@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 11:19:44 +0200 (EET)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
cc: corentin.chary@...il.com, luke@...nes.dev, 
    Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org, 
    LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] platform/x86: wmi: Check if event data is not
 NULL

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:

> Am 19.02.24 um 12:59 schrieb Armin Wolf:
> 
> > WMI event drivers which do not have no_notify_data set expect
> > that each WMI event contains valid data. Evaluating _WED however
> > might return no data, which can cause issues with such drivers.
> > 
> > Fix this by validating that evaluating _WED did return data.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
> > ---
> >   drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c | 11 +++++++++--
> >   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > index 8fb90b726f50..d0fe8153f803 100644
> > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c
> > @@ -1210,6 +1210,7 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block
> > *wblock)
> >   {
> >   	struct wmi_driver *driver = drv_to_wdrv(wblock->dev.dev.driver);
> >   	struct acpi_buffer data = { ACPI_ALLOCATE_BUFFER, NULL };
> > +	union acpi_object *obj = NULL;
> >   	acpi_status status;
> > 
> >   	if (!driver->no_notify_data) {
> > @@ -1218,12 +1219,18 @@ static void wmi_notify_driver(struct wmi_block
> > *wblock)
> >   			dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Failed to get event
> > data\n");
> >   			return;
> >   		}
> > +
> > +		obj = data.pointer;
> > +		if (!obj) {
> > +			dev_warn(&wblock->dev.dev, "Event contains not event
> > data\n");
> 
> I just noticed that this should have been "Event contains no event data\n".
> Should i send
> another patch?

Hi Armin,

As I was doing some history manipulation anyway as is, I tweaked it 
directly in the history. While doing the conflict resolution because of 
that small change I realized the wording got corrected in the latter patch 
anyway so it was quite harmless but it's now correct in both commits in 
review-ilpo branch.

-- 
 i.