On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Suraj Jitindar Singh
<sjitindarsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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>

For both patches:

Acked-by: Rob Herring <r...@kernel.org>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev

Reply via email to