Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756925AbXHEPxV (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:53:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754094AbXHEPxI (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:53:08 -0400 Received: from hancock.steeleye.com ([71.30.118.248]:55147 "EHLO hancock.sc.steeleye.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753924AbXHEPxG (ORCPT ); Sun, 5 Aug 2007 11:53:06 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND] Fix a potential NULL pointer deref in the aic7xxx, ahc_print_register() function From: James Bottomley To: Jesper Juhl Cc: Andrew Morton , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, "Justin T. Gibbs" , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <9a8748490708050836m20b5dd38gf6a8968cd4b106f9@mail.gmail.com> References: <200708042030.52405.jesper.juhl@gmail.com> <1186256627.3439.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> <9a8748490708050836m20b5dd38gf6a8968cd4b106f9@mail.gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 10:53:03 -0500 Message-Id: <1186329183.3455.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.10.3 (2.10.3-2.fc7) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3302 Lines: 96 On Sun, 2007-08-05 at 17:36 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > On 04/08/07, James Bottomley wrote: > > On Sat, 2007-08-04 at 20:30 +0200, Jesper Juhl wrote: > > > (resend of patch previously submitted on 28-Jul-2007 23:06) > > > > > > > > > Ehlo, > > > > > > The Coverity checker noticed that we have a potential NULL pointer > > > deref in drivers/scsi/aic7xxx/aic7xxx_core.c::ahc_print_register(). > > > This patch handles it by adding the same test against NULL that is > > > used elsewhere in the same function. > > > > It's on my list of things to look at ... but not very high. I suspect > > it actually isn't triggerable, but if you can tell me how, it will save > > me from looking. > > > > Here's what Coverity reported : > ... > 6525 int > 6526 ahc_print_register(ahc_reg_parse_entry_t *table, u_int num_entries, > 6527 const char *name, u_int address, u_int value, > 6528 u_int *cur_column, u_int wrap_point) > 6529 { > 6530 int printed; > 6531 u_int printed_mask; > 6532 > > Event var_compare_op: Added "cur_column" due to comparison "cur_column != 0" > Also see events: [var_deref_op] > At conditional (1): "cur_column != 0" taking false path > > 6533 if (cur_column != NULL && *cur_column >= wrap_point) { > 6534 printf("\n"); > 6535 *cur_column = 0; > 6536 } > 6537 printed = printf("%s[0x%x]", name, value); > > At conditional (2): "table == 0" taking true path > > 6538 if (table == NULL) { > 6539 printed += printf(" "); > > Event var_deref_op: Variable "cur_column" tracked as NULL was dereferenced. > Also see events: [var_compare_op] > > 6540 *cur_column += printed; > 6541 return (printed); > 6542 } > ... > > So it requires a NULL 'table' and a != NULL 'cur_column' to trigger. > Whether or not that's actually possible I'm not sure, but it seems > safer to guard against it :) > > > By the way; if this can actually be triggered, then > ahd_print_register() has the same problem. But this is precisely the point. A large number of drivers have purely internal functions, which this is. Most often, because the API is purely internal to the driver, misuse is reported via BUG_ON (supposed to be picked up by the driver writer in their testing). The problem with this is that we never do: BUG_ON(ptr==NULL); Because a simple use of the null pointer will also trigger the bug, so we don't need the check. I suspect table == NULL requires cur_column != NULL as part of the internal API and there's no BUG_ON checking for it because the use of the pointer would be the BUG. If you blindly go checking for NULL and coping with it, you've actually weakened our internal API checking, which definitely isn't the object of the exercise. Worse, becase we have no maintainer for this driver someone touching it could easily get this wrong and a subtle and much harder to find bug will be introduced. So, as I said, if you can prove table == NULL && cur_column == NULL should be a genuine use case of the API then by all means, this can go in. James - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/