linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] iio: pressure: bmp280: Add data ready trigger support

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: <ZsxYUV_GhYHNtyCk@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2024 13:26:25 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>
Cc: Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com>, lars@...afoo.de,
	robh@...nel.org, krzk+dt@...nel.org, conor+dt@...nel.org,
	ang.iglesiasg@...il.com, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
	biju.das.jz@...renesas.com, javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com,
	semen.protsenko@...aro.org, 579lpy@...il.com, ak@...klinger.de,
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 6/7] iio: pressure: bmp280: Add data ready trigger
 support

On Mon, Aug 26, 2024 at 11:01:50AM +0100, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 14:02:22 +0200
> Vasileios Amoiridis <vassilisamir@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 11:06:28PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 08:17:13PM +0200, Vasileios Amoiridis wrote:  

...

> > > > +	fwnode = dev_fwnode(data->dev);
> > > > +	if (!fwnode)
> > > > +		return -ENODEV;  
> > > 
> > > Why do you need this? The below will fail anyway.  
> > 
> > Because If I don't make this check then fwnode might be garbage and I will
> > pass garbage to the fwnode_irq_get() function. Or do I miss something?
> It checks for NULL which is all it can actually be and returns a suitable
> error code if it is.

Actually not. It may be NULL, error pointer, or valid. So, for a bare minimum
this check is not full (and again, fwnode APIs should validate fwnode before
accessing them where it makes sense; if fwnode_irq_get() does not do that or
misses the case(s), it has to be improved).

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko