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: <20161114100447.GJ28701@mwanda>
Date:   Mon, 14 Nov 2016 13:05:42 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>
Cc:     Shiva Kerdel <shiva@...ev.nl>,
        "devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
        "gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nipun Gupta <nipun.gupta@....com>,
        "treding@...dia.com" <treding@...dia.com>,
        Laurentiu Tudor <laurentiu.tudor@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Staging: fsl-mc: include: mc: Kernel type 's16'
 preferred over 'int16_t'

On Fri, Nov 11, 2016 at 02:52:31PM +0000, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/include/mc-bus.h b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/include/mc-bus.h
> > > index e915574..c7cad87 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/include/mc-bus.h
> > > +++ b/drivers/staging/fsl-mc/include/mc-bus.h
> > > @@ -42,8 +42,8 @@ struct msi_domain_info;
> > >   */
> > >  struct fsl_mc_resource_pool {
> > >  	enum fsl_mc_pool_type type;
> > > -	int16_t max_count;
> > > -	int16_t free_count;
> > > +	s16 max_count;
> > 
> > My understanding is that this has to be signed because the design of
> > this driver is that we keep adding devices until the the counter
> > overflows.  After that there are a couple tests for
> > "if (WARN_ON(res_pool->max_count < 0)) " which prevent the driver from
> > working again.
> >
> > This all seems pretty horrible.
> 
> Can you elaborate?
> 
> The resource pools managed by this driver are populated by hardware objects
> discovered when the fsl-mc bus probes a DPRC/container.
> 
> The number of potential objects discovered of a given type is in the hundreds,
> so a signed 16-bit number is order of magnitudes larger than anything we will
> ever encounter.
> 
> Would you feel better about this if max_count was an int?

Yeah.

> 
> The max_count reflects the total number of objects discovered.  If that is
> exceeded we display a warning, because something is horribly wrong.  Nothing
> stops working, the allocator simply refuses to add anything else to the
> free list.

I didn't look at this carefully...  Anyway we can't remove devices
either.  If we just had an upper bound instead of overflowing the s16
then we could still remove devices.

> 
> The only reason max_count is there at all is as an internal check against
> bugs and resource leaks.  If the driver is being removed and a resource
> pool is being freed, max_count must be zero...i.e. all objects should have
> been removed.  If not, there is a leak somewhere.  So, it's a sanity check.
> 

Just use a normal upper bound with a #define instead of an magic number
hidden and then disguised as an integer overflow.

regards,
dan carpenter


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ