From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
The call to rsnd_node_count can potentially return a zero node count
so add a check for this corner case. (Note that the two other calls
to rsnd_node_count in the kernel perform this check, so I think it
justifies adding this). This avoids using a zero nr in a devm_kcalloc
call.
Addresses-Coverity: ("Unchecked return value")
Fixes: c413983eb66a ("ASoC: rsnd: adjust disabled module")
Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
---
sound/soc/sh/rcar/ssiu.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/sound/soc/sh/rcar/ssiu.c b/sound/soc/sh/rcar/ssiu.c
index 5682c74bb7ff..0d8f97633dd2 100644
--- a/sound/soc/sh/rcar/ssiu.c
+++ b/sound/soc/sh/rcar/ssiu.c
@@ -515,6 +515,9 @@ int rsnd_ssiu_probe(struct rsnd_priv *priv)
else
nr = priv->ssi_nr;
+ if (!nr)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
ssiu = devm_kcalloc(dev, nr, sizeof(*ssiu), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!ssiu)
return -ENOMEM;
--
2.31.1
On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 11:37:22AM +0100, Colin King wrote:
> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>
> The call to rsnd_node_count can potentially return a zero node count
> so add a check for this corner case. (Note that the two other calls
> to rsnd_node_count in the kernel perform this check, so I think it
> justifies adding this). This avoids using a zero nr in a devm_kcalloc
> call.
I don't have a problem with the patch, but really the code works fine
as is. A better commit message is:
Most callers of_get_child_count() check that "nr" is non-zero so it
causes a static checker warning when we don't do that here. This
doesn't cause a problem or a crash, but having zero SSUIes (What's
plural of ssui?) doesn't make sense either so let's add a check.
regards,
dan carpenter
Hi
> > From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
> >
> > The call to rsnd_node_count can potentially return a zero node count
> > so add a check for this corner case. (Note that the two other calls
> > to rsnd_node_count in the kernel perform this check, so I think it
> > justifies adding this). This avoids using a zero nr in a devm_kcalloc
> > call.
>
> I don't have a problem with the patch, but really the code works fine
> as is. A better commit message is:
>
> Most callers of_get_child_count() check that "nr" is non-zero so it
> causes a static checker warning when we don't do that here. This
> doesn't cause a problem or a crash, but having zero SSUIes (What's
> plural of ssui?) doesn't make sense either so let's add a check.
For the code
Acked-by: Kuninori Morimoto <[email protected]>
Thank you for your help !!
Best regards
---
Kuninori Morimoto
On 02/06/2021 12:21, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 02, 2021 at 11:37:22AM +0100, Colin King wrote:
>> From: Colin Ian King <[email protected]>
>>
>> The call to rsnd_node_count can potentially return a zero node count
>> so add a check for this corner case. (Note that the two other calls
>> to rsnd_node_count in the kernel perform this check, so I think it
>> justifies adding this). This avoids using a zero nr in a devm_kcalloc
>> call.
>
> I don't have a problem with the patch, but really the code works fine
> as is. A better commit message is:
>
> Most callers of_get_child_count() check that "nr" is non-zero so it
> causes a static checker warning when we don't do that here. This
> doesn't cause a problem or a crash, but having zero SSUIes (What's
> plural of ssui?) doesn't make sense either so let's add a check.
Good idea. I'll send a V2. Thanks Dan.
>
> regards,
> dan carpenter
>