[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf486746-6f96-4f09-bacb-8019e7f33756@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:59:21 -0500
From: Avadhut Naik <avadnaik@....com>
To: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>, kristo@...nel.org, bp@...en8.de,
tony.luck@...el.com, james.morse@....com, mchehab@...nel.org, rric@...nel.org
Cc: linux-edac@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 RESEND] EDAC/ti: Fix possible null pointer dereference
in _emif_get_id()
On 7/24/24 02:10, Ma Ke wrote:
> In _emif_get_id(), of_get_address() may return NULL which is later
> dereferenced. Fix this bug by adding NULL check.
>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Fixes: 86a18ee21e5e ("EDAC, ti: Add support for TI keystone and DRA7xx EDAC")
> Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - added Cc stable line.
> ---
> drivers/edac/ti_edac.c | 3 +++
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/ti_edac.c b/drivers/edac/ti_edac.c
> index 29723c9592f7..db23887b2d81 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/ti_edac.c
> +++ b/drivers/edac/ti_edac.c
> @@ -207,6 +207,9 @@ static int _emif_get_id(struct device_node *node)
> int my_id = 0;
>
> addrp = of_get_address(node, 0, NULL, NULL);
> + if (!addrp)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> my_addr = (u32)of_translate_address(node, addrp);
>
> for_each_matching_node(np, ti_edac_of_match) {
IIUC, the original v2 submitted seems to differ from this RESEND patch
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-edac/20240718134834.826890-1-make24@iscas.ac.cn/
Snippet from submitting-patches:
Don’t add “RESEND” when you are submitting a modified version of your patch or patch series - “RESEND” only applies to resubmission of a patch or patch series which have not been modified in any way from the previous submission.
Any specific reason for this change?
>From a brief look, it seems that the original v2 was correct.
Check for NULL pointer deference might be required in both places
in _emif_get_id().
Also, some more context on how this was noticed might help.
Was it through mere observation?
Thanks,
Avadhut Naik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists