From: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.org>
To: linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Cc: "Jesper Juhl" <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>,
"Satyam Sharma" <satyam.sharma@gmail.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <greg@kroah.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Petko Manolov <petkan@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [linux-usb-devel] [PATCH] USB Pegasus driver - avoid a potential NULL pointer dereference.
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2007 10:49:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200707291049.26619.oliver@neukum.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9a8748490707281655u66e50bbfqba58687b579a85fe@mail.gmail.com>
Am Sonntag 29 Juli 2007 schrieb Jesper Juhl:
> On 29/07/07, Satyam Sharma <satyam.sharma@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 7/29/07, Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > This patch makes sure we don't dereference a NULL pointer in
> > > drivers/net/usb/pegasus.c::write_bulk_callback() in the initial
> > > struct net_device *net = pegasus->net; assignment.
> > > The existing code checks if 'pegasus' is NULL and bails out if
> > > it is, so we better not touch that pointer until after that check.
> > > [...]
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/usb/pegasus.c b/drivers/net/usb/pegasus.c
> > > index a05fd97..04cba6b 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/usb/pegasus.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/usb/pegasus.c
> > > @@ -768,11 +768,13 @@ done:
> > > static void write_bulk_callback(struct urb *urb)
> > > {
> > > pegasus_t *pegasus = urb->context;
> > > - struct net_device *net = pegasus->net;
> > > + struct net_device *net;
> > >
> > > if (!pegasus)
> > > return;
> > >
> > > + net = pegasus->net;
> > > +
> > > if (!netif_device_present(net) || !netif_running(net))
> > > return;
> >
> > Is it really possible that we're called into this function with
> > urb->context == NULL? If not, I'd suggest let's just get rid of
> > the check itself, instead.
> >
> I'm not sure. I am not very familiar with this code. I just figured
> that moving the assignment is potentially a little safer and it is
> certainly no worse than the current code, so that's a safe and
> potentially benneficial change. Removing the check may be safe but I'm
> not certain enough to make that call...
pegasus == NULL there would be a kernel bug. Silently ignoring
it, like the code now wants to do is bad. As the oops has never been
reported, I figure turning it into an explicit debugging test is overkill,
so removal seems to be the best option.
Regards
Oliver
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-07-29 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-07-28 22:19 [PATCH] USB Pegasus driver - avoid a potential NULL pointer dereference Jesper Juhl
2007-07-28 23:37 ` Satyam Sharma
2007-07-28 23:55 ` Jesper Juhl
2007-07-29 8:49 ` Oliver Neukum [this message]
2007-07-29 18:18 ` [linux-usb-devel] " Satyam Sharma
2007-07-30 8:05 ` Petko Manolov
2007-07-30 8:54 ` Satyam Sharma
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=200707291049.26619.oliver@neukum.org \
--to=oliver@neukum.org \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=jesper.juhl@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=petkan@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=satyam.sharma@gmail.com \
/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