linux-kernel - Re: [patch RESEND] atp870u: 64 bit bug in atp885

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]

Message-Id: <201512091307.59549.linux@rainbow-software.org>
Date:	Wed, 9 Dec 2015 13:07:58 +0100
From:	Ondrej Zary <linux@...nbow-software.org>
To:	One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc:	Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
	"James E.J. Bottomley" <JBottomley@...n.com>,
	"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [patch RESEND] atp870u: 64 bit bug in atp885_init()

On Wednesday 09 December 2015 12:53:39 One Thousand Gnomes wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Dec 2015 13:24:53 +0300
> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
> 
> > On 64 bit CPUs there is a memory corruption bug on probe().  It should
> > be a u32 pointer instead of an unsigned long pointer or we write past
> > the end of the setupdata[] array.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@...e.com>
> > ---
> > Resending because we have shuffled the code around so the patch needed
> > to be refreshed against linux-next.  Although I do wonder why we are
> > still working on this code since it has never worked on 64 bit systems
> > so probably all the users gave up a decade ago.
> 
> So this is untested ? If so please make it very clear in the commit
> message because the kernel is IMHO getting too full of polished, neat,
> recently modified, never tested, never used code.
> 
> I agree it would be better if the driver was simply deleted. I've not
> even seen an ATP870 bug report in years.

Maybe because it worked. Although the code was horrible. I've done some big changes to this driver recently (tested, of course).
I can't test this patch as I don't have ATP885 card, only ATP870.

-- 
Ondrej Zary
--
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/