LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sakari Ailus <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Wenwen Wang <email@example.com>
Cc: "open list:STAGING SUBSYSTEM" <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Mauro Carvalho Chehab <email@example.com>,
Alan Cox <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <email@example.com>,
Kangjie Lu <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
open list <email@example.com>,
Hans Verkuil <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Andy Shevchenko <email@example.com>,
Dan Carpenter <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
"open list:STAGING - ATOMISP DRIVER"
Subject: Re: [PATCH] media: staging: atomisp: fix a potential missing-check bug
Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 16:26:10 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <email@example.com> (raw)
On Tue, May 08, 2018 at 08:04:54AM -0500, Wenwen Wang wrote:
> On Tue, May 8, 2018 at 7:16 AM, Dan Carpenter <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 05:38:49PM -0500, Wenwen Wang wrote:
> >> At the end of atomisp_subdev_set_selection(), the function
> >> atomisp_subdev_get_rect() is invoked to get the pointer to v4l2_rect. Since
> >> this function may return a NULL pointer, it is firstly invoked to check
> >> the returned pointer. If the returned pointer is not NULL, then the
> >> function is invoked again to obtain the pointer and the memory content
> >> at the location of the returned pointer is copied to the memory location of
> >> r. In most cases, the pointers returned by the two invocations are same.
> >> However, given that the pointer returned by the function
> >> atomisp_subdev_get_rect() is not a constant, it is possible that the two
> >> invocations return two different pointers. For example, another thread may
> >> race to modify the related pointers during the two invocations.
> > You're assuming a very serious race condition exists.
> >> In that
> >> case, even if the first returned pointer is not null, the second returned
> >> pointer might be null, which will cause issues such as null pointer
> >> dereference.
> > And then complaining that if a really serious bug exists then this very
> > minor bug would exist too... If there were really a race condition like
> > that then we'd want to fix it instead. In other words, this is not a
> > real life bug fix.
> > But it would be fine as a readability or static checker fix so that's
> > fine.
> Thanks for your response. From the performance perspective, this bug
> should also be fixed, as the second invocation is redundant if it is
> expected to return a same pointer as the first one.
The arguments are unchanged so the function returns the same pointer.
Btw. this driver is being removed; please see discussion here:
devel mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-08 13:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-02 22:38 Wenwen Wang
2018-05-08 12:16 ` Dan Carpenter
2018-05-08 13:04 ` Wenwen Wang
2018-05-08 13:26 ` Sakari Ailus [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-05-04 7:29 Wenwen Wang
2018-05-04 13:53 ` Andy Shevchenko
2018-04-28 23:02 Wenwen Wang
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] media: staging: atomisp: fix a potential missing-check bug' \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
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).