From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 787E73C6BA; Fri, 14 Mar 2025 11:41:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741952510; cv=none; b=kRPEayBrMicKcxOYlMx4dqZniJi8nVgxQGlyQjNKLYTHTdaxfYH73iDbLWq34IZ/winsFfvxJGgZtNWyl690ckAH6wvz9p0gYWErNS8TvwUvoLJlQiddM4JFu0+zJMupxdS/Cfz+PcZxvkoqiHwVnBq+HtJUwXndQdC+AIM8ipQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1741952510; c=relaxed/simple; bh=b+N4iAe5kZXWBX3ZlJCpdxKPlfsWdwzYPJJb1b47u5s=; h=From:Date:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=h+hXdm6hzRMmc8W5ZYXEMQaplvp5O8t+OH/vLFKUIavUTdrLzO/b1G30LMrAdoRLUvDbN5CNTU57Wm3ykv8yt18tTs9458EnqLhbHRyy9g0Y1/HQWbjufHZRRMOzZ0tZy3kgufxxyNhLka20dlLNMzn3Sp2xEp7gZyfxHm4iYJM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=EoU7Qg5y; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.19 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="EoU7Qg5y" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1741952508; x=1773488508; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=b+N4iAe5kZXWBX3ZlJCpdxKPlfsWdwzYPJJb1b47u5s=; b=EoU7Qg5y5XDh9nUgUyKP8H5lOrVBwckkrikvC0GgR6r//wPaxuDiE71X lpkcoapkpKTEaeMcjbo3aLxe9KHOYEQHRobendqAysm3fLA07v8dQ8Yc/ ihaDZx4aX2DGsW1ptjXVYsL2ZfGfTw+3rCo+bE7mtOcNoUZQbgfVvYtaT 8cHqz9CG1cUNLnQaNPxtZ8SWj856xK1kZJuubOG/7yOVCbcH3dh/QwitM GWUwn77SEpexYNl+9PhjCnX/U5eF0Zf9DHJZRKKMORaOU8fCNlmfw6sMT ETapo3oPoZ3eWnt6A9nkq6z6vqkgGd2qFxOrAUSdjvuzoZLqdLiZndiw6 A==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: nzmskUHBRl206N5wtsbtZw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: Na3l5NV+T4aT64XR5Mq+xg== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11372"; a="42966325" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,246,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="42966325" Received: from fmviesa005.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.145]) by orvoesa111.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Mar 2025 04:41:47 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5997ZYRHSdSt+bVBmBzgSA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: QyQiBgrPTNW+IKa338ajcw== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.14,246,1736841600"; d="scan'208";a="125878045" Received: from ijarvine-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com (HELO localhost) ([10.245.244.56]) by fmviesa005-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 14 Mar 2025 04:41:46 -0700 From: =?UTF-8?q?Ilpo=20J=C3=A4rvinen?= Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 13:41:42 +0200 (EET) To: Chenyuan Yang cc: W_Armin@gmx.de, Hans de Goede , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: wmi: Add Null check for device In-Reply-To: <20250313162820.3688298-1-chenyuan0y@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <20250313162820.3688298-1-chenyuan0y@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII On Thu, 13 Mar 2025, Chenyuan Yang wrote: Hi, Could you please be consistent in style and write "NULL" also in the shortlog in the subject. > Not all devices have an ACPI companion fwnode, so device might be NULL. > This is similar to the commit cd2fd6eab480 > ("platform/x86: int3472: Check for adev == NULL"). Please fold the paragraph normally. > Add a check for device not being set and return -ENODEV in that case to > avoid a possible NULL pointer deref in parse_wdg(). > > Note, acpi_wmi_probe() under the same file has such a check. Hmm, is this a bogus fix, as parse_wdg() is only called from acpi_wmi_probe() so how can ACPI companion turn NULL in between?? How was this problem found?? > Signed-off-by: Chenyuan Yang > --- > drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c > index 646370bd6b03..54e697838c1e 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/wmi.c > @@ -1091,6 +1091,9 @@ static int parse_wdg(struct device *wmi_bus_dev, struct platform_device *pdev) > u32 i, total; > int retval; > > + if (!device) > + return -ENODEV; > + > status = acpi_evaluate_object(device->handle, "_WDG", NULL, &out); > if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) > return -ENXIO; > -- i.