linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] stm class: correct masterID range in setting via sysfs

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: <87d1q0xqok.fsf@ashishki-desk.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 08 Apr 2016 14:53:15 +0300
From:	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mathieu.poirier@...aro.org,
	zhang.lyra@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] stm class: correct masterID range in setting via sysfs

Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org> writes:

> The type of masterID is defined as 'unsigned int', theoretically one
> can set masterID with a number larger than 'INT_MAX' as long as
> 'stm_data::sw_end' is larger than 'INT_MAX'.
>
> Also, 'stm_data::start' and 'stm_data::end' is initialized in respective
> drivers which should be able to use any value less than 'UINT_MAX' for
> their masterIDs, of course including those values larger than 'INT_MAX',
> but the current policy is wrongly assuming that masterIDs would not be
> larger than 'INT_MAX'.  This patch just corrected that.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chunyan Zhang <zhang.chunyan@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/hwtracing/stm/policy.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/hwtracing/stm/policy.c b/drivers/hwtracing/stm/policy.c
> index 1db1896..ce3edfd 100644
> --- a/drivers/hwtracing/stm/policy.c
> +++ b/drivers/hwtracing/stm/policy.c
> @@ -107,7 +107,7 @@ stp_policy_node_masters_store(struct config_item *item, const char *page,
>  		goto unlock;
>  
>  	/* must be within [sw_start..sw_end], which is an inclusive range */
> -	if (first > INT_MAX || last > INT_MAX || first > last ||
> +	if (first > UINT_MAX || last > UINT_MAX || first > last ||

Of course, I wasn't paying attention, testing an unsigned integer for
being greater than UINT_MAX doesn't really make sense.

Regards,
--
Alex