[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171205205711.GK1701@mobilestation>
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 23:57:11 +0300
From: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
To: Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us>
Cc: Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
"Hubbe, Allen" <Allen.Hubbe@....com>,
"S-k, Shyam-sundar" <Shyam-sundar.S-k@....com>,
"Yu, Xiangliang" <Xiangliang.Yu@....com>,
Gary R Hook <gary.hook@....com>, Sergey.Semin@...latforms.ru,
linux-ntb <linux-ntb@...glegroups.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 03/15] NTB: Fix UB/bug in ntb_mw_get_align()
On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 01:08:44PM -0500, Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 5, 2017 at 12:56 PM, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 05, 2017 at 11:52:32AM -0500, Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us> wrote:
> >> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:17 PM, Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com> wrote:
> >> > Simple (1 << pidx) operation causes undefined behaviour when
> >> > pidx >= 32. It must be casted to u64 to match the actual return
> >> > value of ntb_link_is_up() method, so to have all the possible
> >> > peer indexes covered and to get rid of undefined behaviour.
> >> > Additionally there are special macros in "linux/bitops.h" to perform
> >> > the bit-set-shift operations, so it's recommended to have them used
> >> > for proper bit setting.
> >>
> >> This looks good to me, but also seems like a bug fix. Please comment
> >> on if this is not noticed.
> >>
> >
> > The consequences of the bug isn't noticeable at the moment, but potentially
> > it can be seen on the devices like Switchtec (when multi-portness is finally
> > added). Anyway it's better to fix it now, than to wait for obvious bug.
> > Additionally as I said the originator of the code should have used BIT_ULL
> > instead of the pure bit shifting.
>
> This is more of a question of whether it should go into -stable and be
> outside this patch set. If this is impossible to ever hit, then
> including it here instead of fast tracking it in -stable is fine.
>
> Thanks,
> Jon
>
Yeah, it can wait.
Thanks,
-Sergey
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Sergey
> >
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jon
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com>
> >> > Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > include/linux/ntb.h | 2 +-
> >> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >> >
> >> > diff --git a/include/linux/ntb.h b/include/linux/ntb.h
> >> > index c1646f2c6344..488e586fb76c 100644
> >> > --- a/include/linux/ntb.h
> >> > +++ b/include/linux/ntb.h
> >> > @@ -764,7 +764,7 @@ static inline int ntb_mw_get_align(struct ntb_dev *ntb, int pidx, int widx,
> >> > resource_size_t *size_align,
> >> > resource_size_t *size_max)
> >> > {
> >> > - if (!(ntb_link_is_up(ntb, NULL, NULL) & (1 << pidx)))
> >> > + if (!(ntb_link_is_up(ntb, NULL, NULL) & BIT_ULL(pidx)))
> >> > return -ENOTCONN;
> >> >
> >> > return ntb->ops->mw_get_align(ntb, pidx, widx, addr_align, size_align,
> >> > --
> >> > 2.12.0
> >> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists