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: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 09:30:39 +0100
From: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Thorsten Winkler <twinkler@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/iucv: fix the allocation size of iucv_path_table
 array



On 14.02.24 17:32, Alexander Gordeev wrote:
> iucv_path_table is a dynamically allocated array of pointers to
> struct iucv_path items. Yet, its size is calculated as if it was
> an array of struct iucv_path items.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
>  net/iucv/iucv.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/iucv/iucv.c b/net/iucv/iucv.c
> index 9e62783e6acb..5b56ae6612dd 100644
> --- a/net/iucv/iucv.c
> +++ b/net/iucv/iucv.c
> @@ -156,7 +156,7 @@ static char iucv_error_pathid[16] = "INVALID PATHID";
>  static LIST_HEAD(iucv_handler_list);
>  
>  /*
> - * iucv_path_table: an array of iucv_path structures.
> + * iucv_path_table: array of pointers to iucv_path structures.
>   */
>  static struct iucv_path **iucv_path_table;
>  static unsigned long iucv_max_pathid;
> @@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static int iucv_enable(void)
>  
>  	cpus_read_lock();
>  	rc = -ENOMEM;
> -	alloc_size = iucv_max_pathid * sizeof(struct iucv_path);
> +	alloc_size = iucv_max_pathid * sizeof(*iucv_path_table);
>  	iucv_path_table = kzalloc(alloc_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!iucv_path_table)
>  		goto out;


Reviewed-by: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>

Good catch, thank you.
As we allocate a more than we need, I don't this
needs to be backported to stable. Do you agree?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ