[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20140317232645.GA11450@kroah.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2014 16:26:45 -0700
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@...esas.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] uio: Fix memory size check with vma in
uio_mmap_physical()
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 10:24:21AM +0900, Nobuhiro Iwamatsu wrote:
> Register for the device are mapped in uio_mmap_physical().
> In this case, it might not be the same as the size of VMA always.
Why wouldn't this be the case?
> This uses PAGE_ALIGN to memory size, fix the check of the memory size
> to be mapped.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <nobuhiro.iwamatsu.yj@...esas.com>
> ---
> drivers/uio/uio.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/uio/uio.c b/drivers/uio/uio.c
> index a673e5b..e371f5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/uio/uio.c
> +++ b/drivers/uio/uio.c
> @@ -655,7 +655,7 @@ static int uio_mmap_physical(struct vm_area_struct *vma)
>
> if (mem->addr & ~PAGE_MASK)
> return -ENODEV;
> - if (vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start > mem->size)
> + if (vma->vm_end - vma->vm_start > PAGE_ALIGN(mem->size))
You just increased the size for the check, that seems wrong. Why
wouldn't mem->size be correct here?
What hardware is failing for this with a valid size and end/start
addresses?
thanks,
greg k-h
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists