netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] iio: core: NULLify private pointer when there is no private data

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: <CAMknhBFbQ2BmGd18wC0odO-b_bWvJEO3FCYEtpvhB1fF+MEFgg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 15:06:42 -0600
From: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, 
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, 
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, 
	dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-iio@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>, 
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, 
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, 
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/8] iio: core: NULLify private pointer when there is
 no private data

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 2:50 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> In iio_device_alloc() when size of the private data is 0,
> the private pointer is calculated to behind the valid data.
> NULLify it for good.
>
> Fixes: 6d4ebd565d15 ("iio: core: wrap IIO device into an iio_dev_opaque object")
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c | 8 ++++++--
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> index 4302093b92c7..bd305fa87093 100644
> --- a/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/iio/industrialio-core.c
> @@ -1654,8 +1654,12 @@ struct iio_dev *iio_device_alloc(struct device *parent, int sizeof_priv)
>                 return NULL;
>
>         indio_dev = &iio_dev_opaque->indio_dev;
> -       indio_dev->priv = (char *)iio_dev_opaque +
> -               ALIGN(sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque), IIO_DMA_MINALIGN);
> +
> +       if (sizeof_priv)
> +               indio_dev->priv = (char *)iio_dev_opaque +
> +                       ALIGN(sizeof(struct iio_dev_opaque), IIO_DMA_MINALIGN);
> +       else
> +               indio_dev->priv = NULL;

Do we actually need the else branch here since we use kzalloc() and
therefore indio_dev->priv should already be NULL?

>
>         indio_dev->dev.parent = parent;
>         indio_dev->dev.type = &iio_device_type;
> --
> 2.43.0.rc1.1.gbec44491f096
>
>