Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 09 Apr 2006 15:17:38 -0400 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] i386/x86-64: Return defined error value for bad PCI config space accesses |
| |
Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote: > - if (!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 255)) > + if (!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 255)) { > + *value = -1; > return -EINVAL; > + } > > spin_lock_irqsave(&pci_config_lock, flags); > > diff --git a/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c > index 2002c74..f77d7f8 100644 > --- a/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c > +++ b/arch/i386/pci/mmconfig.c > @@ -80,8 +80,10 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int s > unsigned long flags; > u32 base; > > - if (!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)) > + if (!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095)) { > + *value = -1; > return -EINVAL; > + } > > base = get_base_addr(seg, bus, devfn); > if (!base) > diff --git a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c > index d4e25f3..b493ed9 100644 > --- a/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c > +++ b/arch/x86_64/pci/mmconfig.c > @@ -75,8 +75,10 @@ static int pci_mmcfg_read(unsigned int s > char __iomem *addr; > > /* Why do we have this when nobody checks it. How about a BUG()!? -AK */ > - if (unlikely(!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095))) > + if (unlikely(!value || (bus > 255) || (devfn > 255) || (reg > 4095))) { > + *value = -1;
As the code check indicates, value might be NULL.
Please fix.
Jeff
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |