From: Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@gmail.com>
To: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
Cc: linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
"linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: check if gpio_desc pointer is error or NULL
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2014 17:37:42 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAAVeFu+=D8PJwTUMmaA-PWR5SbBfzQPpdZhtychxZNft6SvmDA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <53295654.5080009@codethink.co.uk>
On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 5:33 PM, Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk> wrote:
> On 19/03/14 02:48, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Some of the gpiod_ calls take a pointer to a gpio_desc as their
>>> argument but only check to see if it is NULL to validate the
>>> input.
>>>
>>> Calls such as devm_gpiod_get() return an error-pointer if they
>>> fail, so doing the following will not work:
>>>
>>> gpio = devm_gpiod_get(...);
>>> gpiod_direction_output(gpio, 0);
>>>
>>> The sequence produces an OOPS like:
>>>
>>> Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address
>>> fffffffe
>>>
>>> Change all calls that check for !desc to use IS_ERR_OR_NULL() to
>>> avoid these issues.
>>
>>
>> This change is certainly correct from a semantics point of view. Maybe
>> I'd argue that the burden is on the caller to check that gpiod_get()
>> returns a valid GPIO descriptor, but having extra security doesn't
>> hurt. However my problem with this change in its current form is that
>> it will hide such forgetfulnesses by making functions like
>> gpiod_get_value() fail silently instead of triggering a oops.
>
>
> On the other hand, it means that we do not have to keep checking
> the validity of the pointer in the caller.
A very scary perspective which I don't think we should support.
Especially since the pointer only needs to be checked once, after
gpiod_get() is called.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-19 8:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-03-18 10:41 [PATCH] gpiolib: check if gpio_desc pointer is error or NULL Ben Dooks
2014-03-19 1:48 ` Alexandre Courbot
2014-03-19 8:33 ` Ben Dooks
2014-03-19 8:37 ` Alexandre Courbot [this message]
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='CAAVeFu+=D8PJwTUMmaA-PWR5SbBfzQPpdZhtychxZNft6SvmDA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=gnurou@gmail.com \
--cc=ben.dooks@codethink.co.uk \
--cc=linus.walleij@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).