The validity of the property input argument to of_remove_property() is never checked within the function and thus it is possible to pass a null value. It happens that this will be picked up in __of_remove_property() as no matching property of the device node will be found and thus an error will be returned, however once again there is no explicit check for a null value. By the time this is detected 2 locks have already been acquired which is completely unnecessary if the property to remove is null. Add an explicit check in the function of_remove_property() for a null property value and return -ENODEV in this case, this is consistent with what the previous return value would have been when the null value was not detected and passed to __of_remove_property(). By moving an explicit check for the property paramenter into the of_remove_property() function, this will remove the need to perform this check in calling code before invocation of the of_remove_property() function. Signed-off-by: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsingh@xxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/of/base.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c index b299de2..64018eb 100644 --- a/drivers/of/base.c +++ b/drivers/of/base.c @@ -1777,6 +1777,9 @@ int of_remove_property(struct device_node *np, struct property *prop) unsigned long flags; int rc; + if (!prop) + return -ENODEV; + mutex_lock(&of_mutex); raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags); -- 2.5.0 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
