From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FROM,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: (qmail 3808 invoked from network); 8 May 2020 15:47:51 -0000 Received-SPF: pass (mother.openwall.net: domain of lists.openwall.com designates 195.42.179.200 as permitted sender) receiver=inbox.vuxu.org; client-ip=195.42.179.200 envelope-from= Received: from mother.openwall.net (195.42.179.200) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 May 2020 15:47:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 1335 invoked by uid 550); 8 May 2020 15:47:49 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-ID: Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com Received: (qmail 1314 invoked from network); 8 May 2020 15:47:49 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.net; s=badeba3b8450; t=1588952857; bh=rIK+hLQCiDMRIFxFpkzZA2FTtZh3NqvhsQjDbJ7QK44=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:Date:From:To:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=kIMXwdn4rwlruS8sTRARVoX0IBbpSPvSoKdttPxOXA3adgocqj3YeO937ACDmDHsZ 7jp1rWmKDxaD5fY2ifLTMIlmDmXs+qjmRqgw6qv2DnbcmaxysQ8MaLUeMafx0keZiy H72kGlhP+JioChG5li+Y/OttrJPAyxaIv6j22tVU= X-UI-Sender-Class: 01bb95c1-4bf8-414a-932a-4f6e2808ef9c Date: Fri, 8 May 2020 17:47:37 +0200 From: Markus Wichmann To: musl@lists.openwall.com Message-ID: <20200508154737.GA25182@voyager> References: <20200508143931.5165-1-zhuyan34@huawei.com> <2f7471a2f0ac45f6bfc48191e16b25ec@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <2f7471a2f0ac45f6bfc48191e16b25ec@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Qe7sBL7r5m7lNPxtnq0DenyRZLanYW4R/niX4+1YeQooL6ui4NN zsMi7wYtbUoeAGRC51ZijQgMePXicHhlJsQ92h+5nvmfAJs+cgAka+ETN6kvP2kxLyorOj3 48CX5qVTUb0YpwNnHlGtCVFDqRQqJ8cwQsdpaFf234VmVXRr4p+pQGdKWpPHIU2IVPkctva 2UxOtElYZub5uKgoV2Mzw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:AVtjA55QDyk=:U1sYLVMBRDKmngfKHQLA3S AQIc9usxxO2beXNTc5aj3g4qv3kQ1lRfERzhlFIIrlzRNaADA5ts9x7B0uK3ZZqenkls+UOn7 Ya9yqBBmW50ROyuXGWevTF/MTbMiz3BSkUvKgSL6McxpGMVbGEAOULxKM4AnonZ40UaEBjS0w QpD6QkaGsuJMAEZYosnsJMZ67wZB5Ken2GFnrCuz5wYltjn+LR+V2+Ow5gf2FZs2MkEQMEmEa 8xQIPoAZp9ylp50+e6VyHbW9wdfzdOueBIwBzf+yUviGEBdbH/nYlnSg1eFdRjseUz5LL3cve Jokb7y+Gz7E1TWTmo6w9ETPOn0mqaPlPMKgdQKNTRfqeqag9LmrNSSXlHruD1elaFuY0AD0F0 p/LU0QmV3XWVzodloWWOmJ5ygtGE3GQoYthvzmFN4Tp+Nd9IScay3ojfYgW2zxzaii19d3Uis N4MqCs1jnff26lAdKB6Vfpfa1/QvbHf4xVL2zpctPyCVll5ixZMN78CRya0Sm7hzBmduo0UrS ytZ4yeTCxbNPzoB6iv1Rr3NmRBMygVADsPoJZ4m0RzdK6F88aYWXWRMZsdt6Piag1JqAZoiXH V5NDXXqOesPxFOVJyjX48GeonvCbSedmR7qPJqTeOhNMKmraO1JZoS/rGZHQB82GXSTjl5Wm/ gd6kzl4Rc1n2oEGYbFXTBTvdUPhbY15FmBgaHqlres36xVzReUZUlLBm9G+q0O4Dp9vZgBtIW 9zKkTHtdJlNNrsda1duzXMIFsaDSW9BmAHISQZ0MrCy6y9nAom89u+ZW9SStslVcxitdcGoLf GrBR9mkegTh0HM1h6Jf0b9gkiWsQo+2GWTBwNbxYDMZp36Nsmk3xD2krJ5hJW2y8qY9kB25/3 F11ro0i4/559aNbB5qiaYGAIs+Lh28f0/qWP5c1xvg0z/s6I/vPSASscB8xmxO/o1ukhoVSdN G8fDqpgT/QJLi7k++L6WHJN9yp1QGqEu0AKzc2BcY53HLQgGUpzTI9lfYs7SvZ/1SzLtt+Lli fDH9tuFe2iB9xeOimqTvuCXyREkAjhn60hfssvqb1MJJ/fTzxzp9jWHQDNT/hFBYbwpuPh2Pi MxyfFtYh15R4gSUauKjZ5wpwzv8NsKP3Kxp42EUJP0FeefOuAXPT7UBKBETGLW+eJ/CLZOXyM yqswGGeXK55Z7pWjshQ556BoN4Slo7wysOj0UFKdBn5/00RvNOg2Ug0p/q/N+eafIpLVD2pZ6 gtJPqfytJ0Nqq2nVM Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [musl] [PATCH] fix coredump when sched_rr_get_interval parameter ts is NULL On Fri, May 08, 2020 at 02:46:56PM +0000, zhuyan (M) wrote: > In function sched_rr_get_interval, there is a risk of null pointer refer= ence. On line 12, when ts is NULL, dereferencing the null pointer will cau= se the program coredump. > > Therefore, it must ensure that ts is not empty before use. > Is calling this function with a NULL pointer sensible? The manpage certainly doesn't say so. Usually policy in musl is to not fix application bugs, but to dereference pointers without NULL pointer check unless there is an explicit requirement in the relevant standards that a NULL pointer be accepted. Ciao, Markus