ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in acpi_processor_add()
PATCH 1/1 ACPI: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference in acpi_processor_add()
In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.
--- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +0 -0
@@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device
*device)
per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr;
dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id);+ if (!dev) {
+ result = -ENODEV;
+ goto err_clear_processor;
+ }
if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) {
result = -EFAULT;
goto err_clear_processor;Signature · 1 line
1.7.1
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>
This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Thanks,
Rafael
Quoted 21 lines
--- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +4
-0@@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)per_cpu (processors, pr->id) = pr; dev =get_cpu_device (pr->id); +if (!dev) { + result = -ENODEV ; + goto err_clear_processor; + }if (sysfs_create_link (&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj,"sysdev" )) { result = -EFAULT ;goto err_clear_processor;
Signature · 2 lines
I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
Quoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
Thanks
Hanjun
Quoted 26 lines
Thanks,
RafaelQuoted 21 lines
--- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +4
-0@@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)per_cpu (processors, pr->id) = pr; dev =get_cpu_device (pr->id); +if (!dev) { + result = -ENODEV ; + goto err_clear_processor; + }if (sysfs_create_link (&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj,"sysdev" )) { result = -EFAULT ;goto err_clear_processor;
Quoted 11 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Martin
Quoted 37 lines
Thanks
HanjunQuoted 17 lines
Thanks,
RafaelQuoted 12 lines
--- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +0
-0@@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device)per_cpu (processors, pr->id) = pr;Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 9 lines
drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +4
-0dev =get_cpu_device (pr->id); +if (!dev) { + result = -ENODEV ; + goto err_clear_processor; + }if (sysfs_create_link (&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj,"sysdev" )) { result = -EFAULT ;goto err_clear_processor;--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Quoted 8 lines · Martin Mokrejs
Quoted 7 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 6 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Hi Rafeal,
What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
Thanks
Hanjun
Quoted 1 line
Martin
Quoted 14 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 13 lines · Martin Mokrejs
Quoted 11 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 3 lines
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Hi Rafeal,
What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable that don't have mainline counterparts.
Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?
Rafael
Signature · 2 lines
I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.
Quoted 19 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 18 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 16 lines · Martin Mokrejs
Quoted 11 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 8 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Hi Rafeal,
What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable that don't have mainline counterparts.
Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?
We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code, and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there.
thanks,
greg k-h
Quoted 24 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 23 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 8 lines · Martin Mokrejs
Quoted 7 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 6 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Hi Rafeal,
What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable that don't have mainline counterparts.
Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?
We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code, and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there.
Hi Rafael,
I found that the problem is still there in your acpi-hotplug tree, sorry for I didn't noticed early. I made a patch for this again, I hope it will make sense to you.
The patch is attached, based on your acpi-hotplug tree.
Thanks
Hanjun
Quoted 1 line
From
975e30f5906a883e533e4226d8eca1c449c7366bMon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 11:36:08 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] ACPI / processor: Fix potential NULL pointer dereference
in acpi_processor_add()
In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL in some cases, and ACPI_HANDLE_SET() just use the return dev directly, this will case a potential NULL pointer dereference, fix it.
--- drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
drivers/acpi/acpi_processor.c +5 -0
@@ -389,6 +389,11 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device,per_cpu (processor_device_array, pr->id) = device; dev =get_cpu_device (pr->id); +if (!dev) { + result = -ENODEV ; + goto err; + } +ACPI_HANDLE_SET (dev, pr->handle); result =acpi_bind_one (dev,NULL );if (result)
Signature · 1 line
1.7.9.5
Quoted 34 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 24 lines · Greg Kroah-Hartman
Quoted 23 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 21 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 8 lines · Martin Mokrejs
Quoted 7 lines · Hanjun Guo
Quoted 6 lines · Rafael J. Wysocki
Quoted 4 lines · Hanjun Guo
In
acpi_processor_add(),get_cpu_device()will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed.Signed-off-by Hanjun Guo <[email protected]>Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree.
Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch.
But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;)
Hi Rafeal,
What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion?
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 4 lines
Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable that don't have mainline counterparts.
Greg, I wonder what your opinion is?
We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code, and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there.
Quoted 7 lines
Hi Rafael,
I found that the problem is still there in your acpi-hotplug tree, sorry for I didn't noticed early. I made a patch for this again, I hope it will make sense to you.
The patch is attached, based on your acpi-hotplug tree.
OK, thanks!
Rafael
Signature · 2 lines
I speak only for myself. Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.