linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/5] hwmon: (hp-wmi-sensors) Check if WMI event data exists

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]

Message-ID: <1b84518a-9f6b-4083-a26b-c85188e23cff@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:11:31 +0200
From: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
To: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: james@...iv.tech, jlee@...e.com, corentin.chary@...il.com,
 luke@...nes.dev, matan@...alib.org, coproscefalo@...il.com,
 Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rafael@...nel.org>, lenb@...nel.org, platform-driver-x86@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] hwmon: (hp-wmi-sensors) Check if WMI event data
 exists

Am 27.08.24 um 10:20 schrieb Ilpo Järvinen:

> On Thu, 22 Aug 2024, Armin Wolf wrote:
>
>> The BIOS can choose to return no event data in response to a
>> WMI event, so the ACPI object passed to the WMI notify handler
>> can be NULL.
>>
>> Check for such a situation and ignore the event in such a case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
>> ---
>>   drivers/hwmon/hp-wmi-sensors.c | 3 +++
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/hp-wmi-sensors.c b/drivers/hwmon/hp-wmi-sensors.c
>> index 6892518d537c..d6bdad26feb1 100644
>> --- a/drivers/hwmon/hp-wmi-sensors.c
>> +++ b/drivers/hwmon/hp-wmi-sensors.c
>> @@ -1628,6 +1628,9 @@ static void hp_wmi_notify(union acpi_object *wobj, void *context)
>>   	 * HPBIOS_BIOSEvent instance.
>>   	 */
>>
>> +	if (!wobj)
>> +		return;
>> +
> I'm left to wonder why is this patch is not placed first? Can't this
> happen regardless who gets the wobj? And in that case, should this have
> a Fixes tag?
>
Good point, i will send a v2 series to correct this.

Thanks,
Armin Wolf