On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 3:32 AM, Geliang Tang <[email protected]> wrote: > When the pdata is NULL, ramoops_probe() segfaults. So this patch adds > a NULL check to it.
While I don't mind the check, is this even possible? A device triggering a ramoops probe should already have a platform_data (excepting the DT case which is already covered). Is there a situation you can create to trigger this Oops? -Kees > > Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <[email protected]> > --- > fs/pstore/ram.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/fs/pstore/ram.c b/fs/pstore/ram.c > index 6ad831b..dd9832d 100644 > --- a/fs/pstore/ram.c > +++ b/fs/pstore/ram.c > @@ -576,6 +576,9 @@ static int ramoops_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > if (cxt->max_dump_cnt) > goto fail_out; > > + if (!pdata) > + goto fail_out; > + > if (!pdata->mem_size || (!pdata->record_size && !pdata->console_size > && > !pdata->ftrace_size && !pdata->pmsg_size)) { > pr_err("The memory size and the record/console size must be " > -- > 2.7.4 > -- Kees Cook Nexus Security
