On 01/29/2015 12:47 PM, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
Fix a possible null pointer dereference, there is otherwise a risk of a possible null pointer dereference. This was found using a static code analysis program called cppcheck Signed-off-by: Rickard Strandqvist <rickard_strandqvist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h index 84defce..00e1361 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/include/lustre_update.h @@ -165,12 +165,14 @@ static inline int update_get_reply_buf(struct update_reply *reply, void **buf, int result; ptr = update_get_buf_internal(reply, index, &size); + + LASSERT((ptr != NULL && size >= sizeof(int)));
Now size is tested before result. So it could assert if result < 0, while the function would have returned before.
+ result = *(int *)ptr; if (result < 0) return result; - LASSERT((ptr != NULL && size >= sizeof(int))); *buf = ptr + sizeof(int); return size - sizeof(int); }
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
