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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <e791f8ed-f6af-d433-5c9b-a68fc9598dcc@linux.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2024 11:20:42 +0300 (EEST)
From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To: Armin Wolf <W_Armin@....de>
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

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?

-- 
 i.