From: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>
To: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, frowand.list@gmail.com,
grant.likely@linaro.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au,
Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] drivers/of: Add check for null property in of_remove_property()
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 15:34:54 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1461821695-19204-1-git-send-email-sjitindarsingh@gmail.com> (raw)
The validity of the property input argument to of_remove_property() is
never checked within the function and thus it is possible to pass a null
value. It happens that this will be picked up in __of_remove_property()
as no matching property of the device node will be found and thus an
error will be returned, however once again there is no explicit check
for a null value. By the time this is detected 2 locks have already been
acquired which is completely unnecessary if the property to remove is
null.
Add an explicit check in the function of_remove_property() for a null
property value and return -ENODEV in this case, this is consistent with
what the previous return value would have been when the null value was
not detected and passed to __of_remove_property().
By moving an explicit check for the property paramenter into the
of_remove_property() function, this will remove the need to perform this
check in calling code before invocation of the of_remove_property()
function.
Signed-off-by: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@gmail.com>
---
drivers/of/base.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
index b299de2..64018eb 100644
--- a/drivers/of/base.c
+++ b/drivers/of/base.c
@@ -1777,6 +1777,9 @@ int of_remove_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *prop)
unsigned long flags;
int rc;
+ if (!prop)
+ return -ENODEV;
+
mutex_lock(&of_mutex);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
--
2.5.0
next reply other threads:[~2016-04-28 5:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-28 5:34 Suraj Jitindar Singh [this message]
2016-04-28 5:34 ` [PATCH 2/2] powerpc: Update of_remove_property() call sites to remove null checking Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-05-03 22:32 ` Tyrel Datwyler
2016-05-05 6:50 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-05-06 1:01 ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-05-06 3:00 ` Suraj Jitindar Singh
2016-05-09 9:41 ` Michael Ellerman
2016-05-04 22:40 ` [2/2] " Michael Ellerman
2016-05-03 13:06 ` [PATCH 1/2] drivers/of: Add check for null property in of_remove_property() Rob Herring
2016-05-04 22:40 ` [1/2] " Michael Ellerman
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=1461821695-19204-1-git-send-email-sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
--to=sjitindarsingh@gmail.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=frowand.list@gmail.com \
--cc=grant.likely@linaro.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=robh+dt@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).