On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 03:43:37PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote: > > In nv17_tv_get_ld_modes(), the return value of drm_mode_duplicate() is > > assigned to mode, which will lead to a possible NULL pointer dereference > > on failure of drm_mode_duplicate(). Add a check to avoid npd. > > Can a wording approach (like the following) be a better change description? > > A null pointer is stored in the local variable “mode” after a call > of the function “drm_mode_duplicate” failed. This pointer was used > in a subsequent statement where an undesirable dereference will > be performed then. > Thus add a corresponding return value check. > > > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > > Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” accordingly? > > > How do you think about to use a summary phrase like > “Prevent null pointer dereference in nv17_tv_get_ld_modes()”? > > > Regards, > Markus > Hi, This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman. Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing list. I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore. Please do not bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time. Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to follow it at all. The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and inability to adapt to feedback. Please feel free to also ignore emails from them. thanks, greg k-h's patch email bot
