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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Fri, 08 Jan 2010 11:16:38 +0100
From:	Jiri Slaby <>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <>,,,
	LKML <>
Subject: bonding: potential null dereference?


I'm looking at Stanse errors and it detected a suspected behaviour in
bonding. In bond_slave_netdev_event, bond_dev is passed down to
netdev_priv, but due to 'if (bond_dev)' test later, it deduced it can be
also NULL.

I can see, that passing NULL to netdev_priv is OK nowadays, as it just
returns NULL + some offset. But what if this changes in the future?

I would bake a patch, but I don't know if bond_dev may be NULL at all
(i.e. superfluous test) or may not (wrong netdev_priv(bond_dev)).

static int (unsigned long event,
                                   struct net_device *slave_dev)
        struct net_device *bond_dev = slave_dev->master;
        struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);

        switch (event) {
                if (bond_dev) {
                        if (bond->setup_by_slave)
                                bond_release(bond_dev, slave_dev);

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists