The validity of the property input argument to of_remove_property() is
never checked within the function and thus it is possible to pass a null
value. It happens that this will be picked up in __of_remove_property()
as no matching property of the device node will be found and thus an
error will be returned, however once again there is no explicit check
for a null value. By the time this is detected 2 locks have already been
acquired which is completely unnecessary if the property to remove is
null.
Add an explicit check in the function of_remove_property() for a null
property value and return -ENODEV in this case, this is consistent with
what the previous return value would have been when the null value was
not detected and passed to __of_remove_property().
By moving an explicit check for the property paramenter into the
of_remove_property() function, this will remove the need to perform this
check in calling code before invocation of the of_remove_property()
function.
Signed-off-by: Suraj Jitindar Singh <sjitindarsi...@gmail.com>
---
drivers/of/base.c | 3 +++
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/of/base.c b/drivers/of/base.c
index b299de2..64018eb 100644
--- a/drivers/of/base.c
+++ b/drivers/of/base.c
@@ -1777,6 +1777,9 @@ int of_remove_property(struct device_node *np, struct
property *prop)
unsigned long flags;
int rc;
+ if (!prop)
+ return -ENODEV;
+
mutex_lock(&of_mutex);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&devtree_lock, flags);
--
2.5.0
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
