Re: [PATCH] cx231xx: correctly handling failed allocation

[Devin Heitmueller]

On Tue, Dec 29, 2015 at 1:53 PM, Insu Yun <wuninsu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since kmalloc can be failed in memory pressure,
> if not properly handled, NULL dereference can be happend
>
> Signed-off-by: Insu Yun <wuninsu@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-417.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-417.c b/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-417.c
> index 47a98a2..9725e4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-417.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/usb/cx231xx/cx231xx-417.c
> @@ -1382,6 +1382,8 @@ static int cx231xx_bulk_copy(struct cx231xx *dev, struct urb *urb)
>         buffer_size = urb->actual_length;
>
>         buffer = kmalloc(buffer_size, GFP_ATOMIC);
> +       if (!buffer)
> +               return -ENOMEM;

A kmalloc() call inside a bulk handler running in softirq context?
That doesn't look right.

That said, I don't have any specific objection to the patch (which I'm
assuming came from some automated tool), but I suspect the cx231xx-417
code is probably completely broken.  The only device I've ever seen
that has the cx23102 and cx23417 is one of the Polaris EVKs, which
AFAIK nobody has ever shipped a production design based on.

Devin

-- 
Devin J. Heitmueller - Kernel Labs
http://www.kernellabs.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/