linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] lib/test_kmod: Fix an integer overflow test

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 24 Feb 2018 11:45:16 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/test_kmod: Fix an integer overflow test

On Sat, Feb 24, 2018 at 02:59:41AM +0000, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 01:27:54PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > The main problem is that the parentheses are in the wrong place and the
> > unlikely() call returns either 0 or 1 so it's never less than zero.
> 
> Doh, thanks, yes. Seems worth considering a grammar rule for it.
> 
> > The other problem is that signed integer overflows like "INT_MAX + 1" are
> > undefined behavior.
> 
> Likewise.
> 
> This seems like another possible generic typo issue. But I would not resolve it
> the way you did, in this particular case below num_test_devs represents the
> number of already registered devs, before we increment. So the way to resolve
> this would be:
> 
> 	if (num_test_devs + 1 == INT_MAX)
> 
> I'll get this upstream, thanks!

There is no issue if num_test_devs is INT_MAX.  But capping it at
INT_MAX - 1 is also fine.

regards,
dan carpenter