[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <8517da06-3010-4356-b5df-d9a14454feec@web.de>
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:43:37 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>, nouveau@...ts.freedesktop.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...hat.com>, David Airlie <airlied@...il.com>,
Karol Herbst <kherbst@...hat.com>, Lyude Paul <lyude@...hat.com>
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drm/nouveau/dispnv04: fix null pointer dereference in
nv17_tv_get_ld_modes
> In nv17_tv_get_ld_modes(), the return value of drm_mode_duplicate() is
> assigned to mode, which will lead to a possible NULL pointer dereference
> on failure of drm_mode_duplicate(). Add a check to avoid npd.
Can a wording approach (like the following) be a better change description?
A null pointer is stored in the local variable “mode” after a call
of the function “drm_mode_duplicate” failed. This pointer was used
in a subsequent statement where an undesirable dereference will
be performed then.
Thus add a corresponding return value check.
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” accordingly?
How do you think about to use a summary phrase like
“Prevent null pointer dereference in nv17_tv_get_ld_modes()”?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists