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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox