Hi Alan,
Quoting Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
On Mon, 1 May 2017, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
Add null check before dereferencing dev->regs pointer inside
net2280_led_shutdown() function.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 101783
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c | 8 +++++---
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c
b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c
index 3828c2e..1898a4b 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/gadget/udc/net2280.c
@@ -3573,7 +3573,11 @@ static void net2280_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
BUG_ON(dev->driver);
/* then clean up the resources we allocated during probe() */
- net2280_led_shutdown(dev);
+
+ if (dev->regs) {
+ net2280_led_shutdown(dev);
+ iounmap(dev->regs);
+ }
if (dev->requests) {
int i;
for (i = 1; i < 5; i++) {
@@ -3588,8 +3592,6 @@ static void net2280_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
free_irq(pdev->irq, dev);
if (dev->quirks & PLX_PCIE)
pci_disable_msi(pdev);
- if (dev->regs)
- iounmap(dev->regs);
if (dev->region)
release_mem_region(pci_resource_start(pdev, 0),
pci_resource_len(pdev, 0));
No, you must not move the iounmap() call, because an interrupt could
theoretically occur at any time.
Yeah, I was suspicious about it.
Either just live with an extra test of dev->regs, or else move the
net2280_led_shutdown() call later.
In this case I think it is safe to move the net2280_led_shutdown()
call, as the function is only turning off the LEDs.
I'll send a patch shortly.
Thank you
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
