linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] uio: uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm: Add NULL check in the uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm

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: <0b99b7e5-a035-4a15-8389-dcb3ca81f96d@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 13:39:21 +0200
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@...il.com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uio: uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm: Add NULL check in the
 uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm_probe

On 31/03/2025 11:27, Henry Martin wrote:
> When devm_kasprintf() fails, it returns a NULL pointer. However, this return value is not properly checked in the function uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm_probe.
> 
> A NULL check should be added after the devm_kasprintf() to prevent potential NULL pointer dereference error.
> 
> Fixes: d57801c45f53e ("uio: uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm: use device-managed allocators")
> 


Same comments as for other patches.

> Signed-off-by: Henry Martin <bsdhenrymartin@...il.com>
> ---
>  drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c b/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c
> index 81454c3e2484..59ba1a2dcfe3 100644
> --- a/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c
> +++ b/drivers/uio/uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm.c
> @@ -384,6 +384,10 @@ static int uio_fsl_elbc_gpcm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	/* set all UIO data */
>  	info->mem[0].name = devm_kasprintf(&pdev->dev, GFP_KERNEL, "%pOFn", node);
> +	if (!info->mem[0].name) {
> +		dev_err(priv->dev, "devm_kasprintf failed for region name\n");


There is never a printk after memory allocation failure.

Also, just like in some of the other patches, you did not really analyze
the code - you leak here resource map. Just look at the entire code
instead of blindly pasting the same code here and there.

Best regards,
Krzysztof