| Message ID | 14636275-4d26-d639-5f6e-293fc6d1c4c6@web.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | drm/bridge: it6505: Move a variable assignment behind a null pointer check in receive_timing_debugfs_show() | expand |
Hey Markus, This patch seems to be a part of a series without being marked as such, this causes issues when importing this patch with maintainer tools like b4 which automatically pull in the entire series and not just the specific patch. Either label the patch as being part of a series ( [PATCH 1/XX] ), or submit it separately. On Sun, Apr 16, 2023 at 5:47 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> wrote: > > Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2023 17:30:46 +0200 > > The address of a data structure member was determined before > a corresponding null pointer check in the implementation of > the function “receive_timing_debugfs_show”. > > Thus avoid the risk for undefined behaviour by moving the assignment > for the variable “vid” behind the null pointer check. > > This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. > > Fixes: b5c84a9edcd418cd055becad6a22439e7c5e3bf8 ("drm/bridge: add it6505 driver") > Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> The email in the Signed-off tag should match the email of the sender, which it doesn't. With the two above issues fixed, please add my r-b. Reviewed-by: Robert Foss <rfoss@kernel.org> > --- > drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c > index abaf6e23775e..45f579c365e7 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c > @@ -3207,7 +3207,7 @@ static ssize_t receive_timing_debugfs_show(struct file *file, char __user *buf, > size_t len, loff_t *ppos) > { > struct it6505 *it6505 = file->private_data; > - struct drm_display_mode *vid = &it6505->video_info; > + struct drm_display_mode *vid; > u8 read_buf[READ_BUFFER_SIZE]; > u8 *str = read_buf, *end = read_buf + READ_BUFFER_SIZE; > ssize_t ret, count; > @@ -3216,6 +3216,7 @@ static ssize_t receive_timing_debugfs_show(struct file *file, char __user *buf, > return -ENODEV; > > it6505_calc_video_info(it6505); > + vid = &it6505->video_info; > str += scnprintf(str, end - str, "---video timing---\n"); > str += scnprintf(str, end - str, "PCLK:%d.%03dMHz\n", > vid->clock / 1000, vid->clock % 1000); > -- > 2.40.0 >
> This patch seems to be a part of a series without being marked as such, The mentioned patch affects only a single function implementation. > this causes issues when importing this patch with maintainer tools > like b4 which automatically pull in the entire series and not > just the specific patch. It is a pity that there are special technical difficulties. > Either label the patch as being part of a series ( [PATCH 1/XX] ), Further software modules were similarly affected. See also: Reconsidering pointer dereferences before null pointer checks (with SmPL) https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/1a11455f-ab57-dce0-1677-6beb8492a257@web.de/ https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2023-04/msg00021.html > or submit it separately. I thought that I did that (in principle). Regards, Markus
On Tue, Apr 25, 2023 at 4:16 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> wrote: > > > This patch seems to be a part of a series without being marked as such, > > The mentioned patch affects only a single function implementation. > > > > this causes issues when importing this patch with maintainer tools > > like b4 which automatically pull in the entire series and not > > just the specific patch. > > It is a pity that there are special technical difficulties. > > > > Either label the patch as being part of a series ( [PATCH 1/XX] ), > > Further software modules were similarly affected. > > See also: > Reconsidering pointer dereferences before null pointer checks (with SmPL) > https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/1a11455f-ab57-dce0-1677-6beb8492a257@web.de/ > https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/cocci/2023-04/msg00021.html > > > > or submit it separately. > > I thought that I did that (in principle). You can have a look at LKML for the email message-id to see the whole thread of patches. https://lore.kernel.org/all/14636275-4d26-d639-5f6e-293fc6d1c4c6@web.de/#r Or https://lore.kernel.org/all/$MSG_ID Fix the email Sign-off email != Sender email issue, resubmit and I'll be able to apply this.
> Fix the email Sign-off email != Sender email issue, resubmit and I'll > be able to apply this. You can pick the email from my tag “Signed-off-by” up also directly as an ordinary patch author email, can't you? Regards, Markus
On Thu, Apr 27, 2023 at 9:40 PM Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de> wrote: > > > Fix the email Sign-off email != Sender email issue, resubmit and I'll > > be able to apply this. > > You can pick the email from my tag “Signed-off-by” up also directly > as an ordinary patch author email, can't you? Of course, I can change the email to anything, but drm maintainer scripts checks for this, presumably for a reason, so it should be correctly submitted. > > Regards, > Markus >
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c index abaf6e23775e..45f579c365e7 100644 --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c @@ -3207,7 +3207,7 @@ static ssize_t receive_timing_debugfs_show(struct file *file, char __user *buf, size_t len, loff_t *ppos) { struct it6505 *it6505 = file->private_data; - struct drm_display_mode *vid = &it6505->video_info; + struct drm_display_mode *vid; u8 read_buf[READ_BUFFER_SIZE]; u8 *str = read_buf, *end = read_buf + READ_BUFFER_SIZE; ssize_t ret, count; @@ -3216,6 +3216,7 @@ static ssize_t receive_timing_debugfs_show(struct file *file, char __user *buf, return -ENODEV; it6505_calc_video_info(it6505); + vid = &it6505->video_info; str += scnprintf(str, end - str, "---video timing---\n"); str += scnprintf(str, end - str, "PCLK:%d.%03dMHz\n", vid->clock / 1000, vid->clock % 1000);
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 2023 17:30:46 +0200 The address of a data structure member was determined before a corresponding null pointer check in the implementation of the function “receive_timing_debugfs_show”. Thus avoid the risk for undefined behaviour by moving the assignment for the variable “vid” behind the null pointer check. This issue was detected by using the Coccinelle software. Fixes: b5c84a9edcd418cd055becad6a22439e7c5e3bf8 ("drm/bridge: add it6505 driver") Signed-off-by: Markus Elfring <elfring@users.sourceforge.net> --- drivers/gpu/drm/bridge/ite-it6505.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) -- 2.40.0