linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] acpi: fix apei related table size checking

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1280130099.2771.150.camel@yhuang-dev>
Date:	Mon, 26 Jul 2010 15:41:39 +0800
From:	Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To:	Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
Cc:	Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
	Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@...il.com>,
	"linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] acpi: fix apei related table size checking

On Sat, 2010-07-24 at 01:39 +0800, Yinghai Lu wrote: 
> also check if we can find right action in apei.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>
> 
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c |    5 +++++
>  drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c      |    3 ++-
>  drivers/acpi/apei/erst.c      |    3 ++-
>  3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/apei/einj.c
> @@ -426,7 +426,8 @@ DEFINE_SIMPLE_ATTRIBUTE(error_inject_fop
>  
>  static int einj_check_table(struct acpi_table_einj *einj_tab)
>  {
> -	if (einj_tab->header_length != sizeof(struct acpi_table_einj))
> +	if (einj_tab->header_length !=
> +	    (sizeof(struct acpi_table_einj) - sizeof(einj_tab->header)))
>  		return -EINVAL;

It seems that the header_length field is not set properly by BIOS on my
testing machine which I used to develop the original code. Will try to
contact BIOS guys to make sure.

> Index: linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c
> ===================================================================
> --- linux-2.6.orig/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c
> +++ linux-2.6/drivers/acpi/apei/apei-base.c
> @@ -163,6 +163,7 @@ int apei_exec_run(struct apei_exec_conte
>  	u32 i, ip;
>  	struct acpi_whea_header *entry;
>  	apei_exec_ins_func_t run;
> +	bool found_action = false;
>  
>  	ctx->ip = 0;
>  
> @@ -178,6 +179,7 @@ rewind:
>  		entry = &ctx->action_table[i];
>  		if (entry->action != action)
>  			continue;
> +		found_action = true;
>  		if (ip == ctx->ip) {
>  			if (entry->instruction >= ctx->instructions ||
>  			    !ctx->ins_table[entry->instruction].run) {
> @@ -198,6 +200,9 @@ rewind:
>  			goto rewind;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (!found_action)
> +		return -ENODEV;

-ENOENT is better here?

Best Regards,
Huang Ying


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/