is the patch below still necessary after this (upstream) fix: http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9747#c2 thanks, -Len On Monday 28 January 2008 00:53, Zhao Yakui wrote: > Subject: ACPI : Check parameter when calling acpi_processor_get/set_throttling > >From : Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@xxxxxxxxx> > > It is necessary to check the parameter when calling the function of > acpi_processor_get/set_throttling function so as to avoid the NULL > pointer reference in pr or throttling. > > http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=9747 > > Signed-off-by: Zhao Yakui <yakui.zhao@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c > =================================================================== > --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c > +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/processor_throttling.c > @@ -589,6 +589,11 @@ static int acpi_processor_get_throttling > cpumask_t saved_mask; > int ret; > > + if (!pr) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (!pr->flags.throttling) > + return -ENODEV; > /* > * Migrate task to the cpu pointed by pr. > */ > @@ -743,6 +748,16 @@ int acpi_processor_set_throttling(struct > { > cpumask_t saved_mask; > int ret; > + > + if (!pr) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + if (!pr->flags.throttling) > + return -ENODEV; > + > + if ((state < 0) || (state > (pr->throttling.state_count - 1))) > + return -EINVAL; > + > /* > * Migrate task to the cpu pointed by pr. > */ > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > > - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
