[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20240821151604.7fbb834fa1503d11b373212b@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Aug 2024 15:16:04 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn>
Cc: tony@...mide.com, haojian.zhuang@...aro.org, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND] pinctrl: single: fix potential NULL dereference
in pcs_get_function()
On Wed, 21 Aug 2024 14:21:32 +0800 Ma Ke <make24@...as.ac.cn> wrote:
> pinmux_generic_get_function() can return NULL and the pointer 'function'
> was dereferenced without checking against NULL. Add checking of pointer
> 'function' in pcs_get_function().
>
> Found by code review.
>
> ...
>
> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-single.c
> @@ -345,6 +345,8 @@ static int pcs_get_function(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned pin,
> return -ENOTSUPP;
> fselector = setting->func;
> function = pinmux_generic_get_function(pctldev, fselector);
> + if (!function)
> + return -EINVAL;
> *func = function->data;
> if (!(*func)) {
> dev_err(pcs->dev, "%s could not find function%i\n",
Maybe. Or maybe pinmux_generic_get_function() must always return a
valid pointer, in which case
BUG_ON(!function);
is an appropriate thing. But a null-pointer deref gives us the same
info, so no change is needed.
btw, pinmux_generic_get_function() is funny:
if (!function)
return NULL;
return function;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists