lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Feb]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: linux-next: dock_link_device is oopsy
    On 02/18/2012 02:57 PM, Holger Macht wrote:
    > On Sa 18. Feb - 10:46:04, Hugh Dickins wrote:
    >> On Sat, 18 Feb 2012, Holger Macht wrote:
    >>> How about that one?
    >>
    >> It's more broken than that. Here's my attempt. It boots on the
    >> systems with dock_station_count 0, and it boots on my laptop with
    >> dock_station_count 2; but I don't actually have any docking station,
    >> so it still doesn't test very much (dock is 0 after the loop).
    >
    > Well, there doesn't have to actually exist a physical dock station (or
    > bay device) for dock_station_count to be> 0. It just tells that the
    > ACPI objects are present and thus the system is capable of it.
    >
    > So does this function actually also break on your laptop and you're
    > getting the oops there, too?
    >
    >> I have no idea if what goes on in the loop is correct, but it looks
    >> to me as if (as predicted) there's further breakage, that it would
    >> have been writing beyond the end of what it allocated if I did have
    >> a docking station.
    >>
    >> Hugh
    >>
    >> [PATCH] dock: fix bootup oops and other dock_link breakage
    >>
    >> dock_link_device() and dock_unlink_device() should bail out early
    >> to avoid oops on zero-length kmalloc() when dock_station_count is 0.
    >>
    >> But isn't there an off-by-one in that kmalloc() length anyway?
    >> An extra NULL appended at the end suggests so.
    >>
    >> Rework the ordering with gotos on failure to fix several issues.
    >>
    >> And presumably dock_unlink_device() should be presenting the same
    >> interface as dock_link_device(), with NULL returned when none found.
    >>
    >> Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins<hughd@google.com>
    >
    > Fine with me.

    So, just to be clear, the preferred patch is Hugh's, and I should drop
    your earlier proposed fix found in this thread?

    And what about that warning?

    Need to fix up linux-next or temporarily drop this patchset from linux-next.

    Jeff






    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2012-02-21 23:27    [W:0.024 / U:60.484 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site