linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.19.y-ckt 108/130] ipr: Fix invalid array indexing for HRRQ

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-Id: <1440713521-5906-109-git-send-email-kamal@canonical.com>
Date:	Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:11:39 -0700
From:	Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...ts.ubuntu.com
Cc:	Brian King <brking@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	James Bottomley <JBottomley@...n.com>,
	Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
Subject: [PATCH 3.19.y-ckt 108/130] ipr: Fix invalid array indexing for HRRQ

3.19.8-ckt6 -stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Brian King <brking@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>

commit 3f1c0581310d5d94bd72740231507e763a6252a4 upstream.

Fixes another signed / unsigned array indexing bug in the ipr driver.
Currently, when hrrq_index wraps, it becomes a negative number. We
do the modulo, but still have a negative number, so we end up indexing
backwards in the array. Given where the hrrq array is located in memory,
we probably won't actually reference memory we don't own, but nonetheless
ipr is still looking at data within struct ipr_ioa_cfg and interpreting it as
struct ipr_hrr_queue data, so bad things could certainly happen.

Each ipr adapter has anywhere from 1 to 16 HRRQs. By default, we use 2 on new
adapters.  Let's take an example:

Assume ioa_cfg->hrrq_index=0x7fffffffe and ioa_cfg->hrrq_num=4:

The atomic_add_return will then return -1. We mod this with 3 and get -2, add
one and get -1 for an array index.

On adapters which support more than a single HRRQ, we dedicate HRRQ to adapter
initialization and error interrupts so that we can optimize the other queues
for fast path I/O. So all normal I/O uses HRRQ 1-15. So we want to spread the
I/O requests across those HRRQs.

With the default module parameter settings, this bug won't hit, only when
someone sets the ipr.number_of_msix parameter to a value larger than 3 is when
bad things start to happen.

Tested-by: Wen Xiong <wenxiong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Wen Xiong <wenxiong@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Gabriel Krisman Bertazi <krisman@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Brian King <brking@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@...cle.com>
Signed-off-by: James Bottomley <JBottomley@...n.com>
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <kamal@...onical.com>
---
 drivers/scsi/ipr.c | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/scsi/ipr.c b/drivers/scsi/ipr.c
index 05d5350..f13996e 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/ipr.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/ipr.c
@@ -1045,10 +1045,15 @@ static void ipr_send_blocking_cmd(struct ipr_cmnd *ipr_cmd,

 static int ipr_get_hrrq_index(struct ipr_ioa_cfg *ioa_cfg)
 {
+	unsigned int hrrq;
+
 	if (ioa_cfg->hrrq_num == 1)
-		return 0;
-	else
-		return (atomic_add_return(1, &ioa_cfg->hrrq_index) % (ioa_cfg->hrrq_num - 1)) + 1;
+		hrrq = 0;
+	else {
+		hrrq = atomic_add_return(1, &ioa_cfg->hrrq_index);
+		hrrq = (hrrq % (ioa_cfg->hrrq_num - 1)) + 1;
+	}
+	return hrrq;
 }

 /**
-- 
1.9.1

--
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/