From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dan Carpenter Subject: Re: [smatch stuff] altera_uart: inconsistent checks for null Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2011 17:02:05 +0300 Message-ID: <20110219140204.GE4384@bicker> References: <20110219093107.GC4384@bicker> <20110219132217.GH759@distanz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f52.google.com ([209.85.214.52]:42895 "EHLO mail-bw0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754385Ab1BSOHn (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Feb 2011 09:07:43 -0500 Received: by bwz4 with SMTP id 4so4329783bwz.11 for ; Sat, 19 Feb 2011 06:07:41 -0800 (PST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20110219132217.GH759@distanz.ch> Sender: linux-serial-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org To: Tobias Klauser Cc: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, nios2-dev@sopc.et.ntust.edu.tw On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 02:22:17PM +0100, Tobias Klauser wrote: > Hi Dan, > > On 2011-02-19 at 10:31:07 +0100, Dan Carpenter wrote: > > Patch 2780ad42f5fe67 "tty: serial: altera_uart: Use port->regshift to > > store bus shift" added a NULL check for platp in altera_uart_probe() but > > not consistently through out the function. > > > > drivers/tty/serial/altera_uart.c +553 altera_uart_probe(43) > > error: we previously assumed 'platp' could be null. > > > > 545 if (platp) > > ^^^^^^^ > > checked here. > > > > 546 port->regshift = platp->bus_shift; > > 547 else > > 548 port->regshift = 0; > > 549 > > 550 port->line = i; > > 551 port->type = PORT_ALTERA_UART; > > 552 port->iotype = SERIAL_IO_MEM; > > 553 port->uartclk = platp->uartclk; > > ^^^^^^^ > > potential NULL dereference? > > Not at the moment, because everybody is using platform data at the > momenti, so platp should never be NULL. Still this is inconsistent and > shouldn't be there like this. The dereference on line 553 will go away > with the patch introducing device tree support to altera_uart [1]. > > [1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/2/18/100 > > > 554 port->ops = &altera_uart_ops; > > > > I don't know the right way to address this. > > I guess either Greg or Grant will take the above mentioned patch (it > depends on a commit in Grant's tree). > Sounds good. regards, dan carpenter