linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] intel_th: core: fix null pointer dereference in intel_th

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: <32755d36-050e-413f-93b9-55d8306c165d@web.de>
Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2025 13:55:52 +0100
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: David Arcari <darcari@...hat.com>, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
 Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Jerry Hoemann <jerry.hoemann@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] intel_th: core: fix null pointer dereference in
 intel_th_irq

> In certain cases intel_th_irq can reference a null entry in
> the th->thdev array.  This results in the splat shown below.
> The problem is that intel_th_output_enable() can modify the
> thdev[] array at the same time intel_th_irq is referencing
> the same array.  This can be fixed by disabling interrupts
> during the call to intel_th_output_enable().

1. Would another imperative wording become helpful for an improved change description?
   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.18-rc6#n94

2. You may occasionally put more than 60 characters into text lines
   of such a change description.

3. Would a summary phrase like “Prevent null pointer dereference
   in intel_th_output_enable()” be more appropriate?

Regards,
Markus