linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: apple-gpio: Fix null pointer dereference in apple_gpio_pinctrl

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]

Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2024 13:53:02 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To: Ma Ke <make_ruc2021@....com>, marcan@...can.st, sven@...npeter.dev,
 alyssa@...enzweig.io, linus.walleij@...aro.org
Cc: asahi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: apple-gpio: Fix null pointer dereference in
 apple_gpio_pinctrl_probe()

On 09/04/2024 13:02, Ma Ke wrote:
> devm_kasprintf() returns a pointer to dynamically allocated memory which
> can be NULL upon failure. We add a check to ensure that failure does not
> occur.
> 

Subject: I doubt that there is null pointer dereference... Don't just
copy existing commit msgs or subjects without adjusting to real case.

> Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make_ruc2021@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-apple-gpio.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-apple-gpio.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-apple-gpio.c
> index 3751c7de37aa..af2f90d1950f 100644
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-apple-gpio.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-apple-gpio.c
> @@ -474,6 +474,8 @@ static int apple_gpio_pinctrl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	for (i = 0; i < npins; i++) {
>  		pins[i].number = i;
>  		pins[i].name = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev, GFP_KERNEL, "PIN%u", i);
> +		if (!pins[i].name)
> +			return -ENOMEM;
>  		pins[i].drv_data = pctl;

The check is a bit later, so please be more precise how do you fix it
and how did you reproduced it.

Maybe checking earlier is reasonable, maybe is redundant. You did not
address it...

Best regards,
Krzysztof