From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Shaobo <shaobo@cs.utah.edu>
Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org, mchehab@kernel.org,
hverkuil@xs4all.nl, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com,
ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Dead code in v4l2-mem2mem.c?
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2017 12:53:43 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2249581.t3xTjk4llj@avalon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <00a901d2894d$95c553b0$c14ffb10$@cs.utah.edu>
Hi Shaobo,
On Friday 17 Feb 2017 11:42:25 Shaobo wrote:
> Hi Laurent,
>
> Thanks a lot for your reply.
>
> I would like to also point out the inconsistency of using `v4l2_m2m_get_vq`
> inside drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-mem2mem.c and inside other files. It
> appears to me almost all call sites of `v4l2_m2m_get_vq` in
> drivers/media/v4l2-core/v4l2-mem2mem.c does not have NULL check afterwards
> while in other files (e.g., drivers/media/platform/mx2_emmaprp.c) they do. I
> was wondering if there is special assumption on this function in mem2mem.c.
I don't see any case where the function could reasonably be called with a NULL
context other than a severe driver bug. This being said, we need to audit the
callers to make sure that's really the case. Would you like to do so and
submit a patch ? :-)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Laurent Pinchart [mailto:laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com]
> Sent: 2017年2月17日 3:26
> To: Shaobo <shaobo@cs.utah.edu>
> Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org; mchehab@kernel.org; hverkuil@xs4all.nl;
> sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com; ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com
> Subject: Re: Dead code in v4l2-mem2mem.c?
>
> Hi Shaobo,
>
> First of all, could you please make sure you send future mails to the linux-
> media mailing list in plain text only (no HTML) ? The mailing list server
> rejects HTML e-mails.
>
> On Thursday 16 Feb 2017 16:08:25 Shaobo wrote:
> > Hi there,
> >
> > My name is Shaobo He and I am a graduate student at University of
> > Utah. I am applying a static analysis tool to the Linux device
> > drivers, looking for NULL pointer dereference and accidentally found a
> > plausible dead code location in v4l2-mem2mem.c due to undefined behavior.
> >
> > The following is the problematic code segment,
> >
> > static struct v4l2_m2m_queue_ctx *get_queue_ctx(struct v4l2_m2m_ctx
> > *m2m_ctx,
> >
> > enum v4l2_buf_type type)
> >
> > {
> >
> > if (V4L2_TYPE_IS_OUTPUT(type))
> >
> > return &m2m_ctx->out_q_ctx;
> >
> > else
> >
> > return &m2m_ctx->cap_q_ctx;
> >
> > }
> >
> > struct vb2_queue *v4l2_m2m_get_vq(struct v4l2_m2m_ctx *m2m_ctx,
> >
> > enum v4l2_buf_type type)
> >
> > {
> >
> > struct v4l2_m2m_queue_ctx *q_ctx;
> >
> > q_ctx = get_queue_ctx(m2m_ctx, type);
> > if (!q_ctx)
> >
> > return NULL;
> >
> > return &q_ctx->q;
> >
> > }
> >
> > `get_queue_ctx` returns a pointer value that is an addition of the
> > base pointer address (`m2m_ctx`) to a non-zero offset. The following
> > is the definition of struct v4l2_m2m_ctx,
> >
> > struct v4l2_m2m_ctx {
> >
> > /* optional cap/out vb2 queues lock */
> > struct mutex *q_lock;
> >
> > /* internal use only */
> > struct v4l2_m2m_dev *m2m_dev;
> >
> > struct v4l2_m2m_queue_ctx cap_q_ctx;
> >
> > struct v4l2_m2m_queue_ctx out_q_ctx;
> >
> > /* For device job queue */
> > struct list_head queue;
> > unsigned long job_flags;
> > wait_queue_head_t finished;
> >
> > void *priv;
> >
> > };
> >
> > There is a NULL test in a caller of `get_queue_ctx` (line 85), which
> > appears problematic to me. I'm not sure if it is defined or feasible
> > under the context of Linux kernel. This blog
> > (https://wdtz.org/undefined-behavior-in-binutils-causes-segfault.html)
> > suggests that the NULL check can be optimized away because the only
> > case that the return value can be NULL triggers pointer overflow,
> > which is undefined.
> >
> > Please let me know if it makes sense or not. Thanks for your time and
> > I am looking forward to your reply.
>
> The NULL check is indeed wrong. I believe that the m2m_ctx argument passed
> to the v4l2_m2m_get_vq() function should never be NULL. We will however need
> to audit drivers to make sure that's the case. The NULL check could then be
> removed. Alternatively we could check m2m_ctx above the get_queue_ctx()
> call, which wouldn't require auditing drivers. It's a safe option, but
> would likely result in an unneeded NULL check.
>
> --
> Regards,
>
> Laurent Pinchart
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-02-18 10:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <002201d288a9$93dd7360$bb985a20$@cs.utah.edu>
2017-02-17 10:26 ` Dead code in v4l2-mem2mem.c? Laurent Pinchart
2017-02-17 18:42 ` Shaobo
2017-02-18 10:53 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2017-02-20 19:49 ` Shaobo
2017-02-22 19:54 ` Laurent Pinchart
2017-02-17 3:47 Shaobo
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2249581.t3xTjk4llj@avalon \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=hverkuil@xs4all.nl \
--cc=linux-media@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mchehab@kernel.org \
--cc=ricardo.ribalda@gmail.com \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=shaobo@cs.utah.edu \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.