netdev - Re: [PATCH] ieee802154: ca8210: Add missing check for kfifo_alloc() in ca8210

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: <20241104121216.GD2118587@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 4 Nov 2024 12:12:16 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Keisuke Nishimura <keisuke.nishimura@...ia.fr>
Cc: Alexander Aring <alex.aring@...il.com>,
	Stefan Schmidt <stefan@...enfreihafen.org>,
	Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	linux-wpan@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ieee802154: ca8210: Add missing check for kfifo_alloc()
 in ca8210_probe()

+ Marcel

On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 07:27:12PM +0100, Keisuke Nishimura wrote:
> ca8210_test_interface_init() returns the result of kfifo_alloc(),
> which can be non-zero in case of an error. The caller, ca8210_probe(),
> should check the return value and do error-handling if it fails.
> 
> Fixes: ded845a781a5 ("ieee802154: Add CA8210 IEEE 802.15.4 device driver")
> Signed-off-by: Keisuke Nishimura <keisuke.nishimura@...ia.fr>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c | 6 +++++-
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> index e685a7f946f0..753215ebc67c 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ieee802154/ca8210.c
> @@ -3072,7 +3072,11 @@ static int ca8210_probe(struct spi_device *spi_device)
>  	spi_set_drvdata(priv->spi, priv);
>  	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IEEE802154_CA8210_DEBUGFS)) {
>  		cascoda_api_upstream = ca8210_test_int_driver_write;
> -		ca8210_test_interface_init(priv);
> +		ret = ca8210_test_interface_init(priv);
> +		if (ret) {
> +			dev_crit(&spi_device->dev, "ca8210_test_interface_init failed\n");
> +			goto error;

Hi Nishimura-san,

I see that this will conditionally call kfifo_free().
Is that safe here? And in branches to error above this point?

> +		}
>  	} else {
>  		cascoda_api_upstream = NULL;
>  	}
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
>