[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87tt4mok84.ffs@tglx>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2025 08:39:23 +0200
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Gyeyoung Baek <gye976@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: Fix uninitialized pointers
On Tue, May 27 2025 at 18:35, Gyeyoung Baek wrote:
The subject line prefix is wrong. See
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/maintainer-tip.html#patch-subject
> Fix uninitialized `ops` member's pointers to avoid kernel Oops in
You cannot fix an uninitialized pointer. You only can initialize it
properly.
> `irq_sim_request_resources()`.
No backticks required. fun() is clear on it's own.
Also please describe how this ends up with an oops in
irq_sim_request_resources(). The point is that any dereference of an
uninitialized pointer is resulting in a problem and it does not matter
where.
Dereferencing an uninitialized pointer can cause an Ooops or worse it
can call into some random code when the uninitialized memory contained a
valid pointer, which is way harder to debug than a plain crash.
> index 1a3d483548e2..67fd1de5d197 100644
> --- a/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c
> +++ b/kernel/irq/irq_sim.c
> @@ -222,8 +222,12 @@ struct irq_domain *irq_domain_create_sim_full(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode,
> work_ctx->pending = no_free_ptr(pending);
> work_ctx->user_data = data;
>
> - if (ops)
> + if (ops) {
> memcpy(&work_ctx->ops, ops, sizeof(*ops));
> + } else {
> + work_ctx->ops.irq_sim_irq_released = NULL;
> + work_ctx->ops.irq_sim_irq_requested = NULL;
> + }
The obvious fix is way more simple. Just allocate work_ctx with
kzalloc() instead of kmalloc(), no?
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists