On Monday, July 10, 2017 09:29:35 AM Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Mon 2017-07-10 10:21:40, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > In the current code, if the user accidentally writes a bogus command to
> > this sysfs file, then we set the latency tolerance to an uninitialized
> > variable.
> >
> > Fixes: 2d984ad132a8 ("PM / QoS: Introcuce latency tolerance device PM QoS type")
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Acked-by: Pavel Machek <pavel@xxxxxx>
>
> I'd suggest this is a stable candidate. It only leaks 32 bits to
> userspace, but still...
>
> > @@ -272,6 +272,8 @@ static ssize_t pm_qos_latency_tolerance_store(struct device *dev,
> > value = PM_QOS_LATENCY_TOLERANCE_NO_CONSTRAINT;
> > else if (!strcmp(buf, "any") || !strcmp(buf, "any\n"))
> > value = PM_QOS_LATENCY_ANY;
> > + else
> > + return -EINVAL;
> > }
> > ret = dev_pm_qos_update_user_latency_tolerance(dev, value);
> > return ret < 0 ? ret : n;
>
>
Applied, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
