net/nfc/nci/spi.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
Handle memory allocation failure from nci_skb_alloc() (calling
alloc_skb()) to avoid possible NULL pointer dereference.
Reported-by: 黄思聪 <huangsicong@iie.ac.cn>
Fixes: 391d8a2da787 ("NFC: Add NCI over SPI receive")
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
---
net/nfc/nci/spi.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/nfc/nci/spi.c b/net/nfc/nci/spi.c
index 0935527d1d12..b68150c971d0 100644
--- a/net/nfc/nci/spi.c
+++ b/net/nfc/nci/spi.c
@@ -151,6 +151,8 @@ static int send_acknowledge(struct nci_spi *nspi, u8 acknowledge)
int ret;
skb = nci_skb_alloc(nspi->ndev, 0, GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!skb)
+ return -ENOMEM;
/* add the NCI SPI header to the start of the buffer */
hdr = skb_push(skb, NCI_SPI_HDR_LEN);
--
2.34.1
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (main)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:
On Fri, 13 Oct 2023 20:41:29 +0200 you wrote:
> Handle memory allocation failure from nci_skb_alloc() (calling
> alloc_skb()) to avoid possible NULL pointer dereference.
>
> Reported-by: 黄思聪 <huangsicong@iie.ac.cn>
> Fixes: 391d8a2da787 ("NFC: Add NCI over SPI receive")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net-next] nfc: nci: fix possible NULL pointer dereference in send_acknowledge()
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/7937609cd387
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
On Fri, Oct 13, 2023 at 08:41:29PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> Handle memory allocation failure from nci_skb_alloc() (calling
> alloc_skb()) to avoid possible NULL pointer dereference.
>
> Reported-by: 黄思聪 <huangsicong@iie.ac.cn>
> Fixes: 391d8a2da787 ("NFC: Add NCI over SPI receive")
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@linaro.org>
Thanks,
I agree that nci_skb_alloc() may turn NULL and that this
is an appropriate way to handle that.
As an aside, I observe that the return value of send_acknowledge()
is not checked. But I don't think that affects the correctness of this
change.
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
© 2016 - 2025 Red Hat, Inc.