linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH next] pds_fwctl: Fix a NULL vs IS_ERR() check in pdsfc_validate

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: <4a895660-c962-4598-ad71-01319e07b59f@amd.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2025 09:30:50 -0700
From: "Nelson, Shannon" <shannon.nelson@....com>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
Cc: Brett Creeley <brett.creeley@....com>, Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
 Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
 Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
 Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH next] pds_fwctl: Fix a NULL vs IS_ERR() check in
 pdsfc_validate_rpc()

On 3/19/2025 9:27 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 07:26:10PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 09:18:31AM -0700, Nelson, Shannon wrote:
>>> On 3/19/2025 12:06 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>>>
>>>> The pdsfc_get_operations() function returns error pointers, it doesn't
>>>> return NULL.  However, the "ep_info->operations" pointer should be set
>>>> to either a valid pointer or NULL because the rest of the driver checks
>>>> for that.
>>>>
>>>> Fixes: 804294d75ac5 ("pds_fwctl: add rpc and query support")
>>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
>>>
>>> Hi Dan, thanks for this patch.  We also have this same fix in the patchset
>>> update that I was expecting to push out today, but you beat me to it.
>>>
>>> Shall I continue with our v4 patchset, or should I now be sending smaller
>>> patches to update from earlier review comments?
>>>
>>
>> I don't track how these things are merged.  If you were going to fix
>> it in a v4 patchset then just ignore this patch.  Typically in that
>> case you would fold the fix into the patchset anyway.
> 
> Right, please just send v4 and include a fix Dan's report.

Thanks, will do.
sln