linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Redo function to get SMCA bank type

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: <20180214193547.GB19502@pd.tnic>
Date:   Wed, 14 Feb 2018 20:35:47 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To:     "Ghannam, Yazen" <Yazen.Ghannam@....com>
Cc:     "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org" <linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Redo function to get SMCA bank type

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 04:38:34PM +0000, Ghannam, Yazen wrote:
> I know that we're declaring smca_banks[] to have MAX_NR_BANKS items. But
> shouldn't we directly check that an index is within the bounds of the array?
> We'll have a bug if we check against MAX_NR_BANKS and the definition of
> smca_banks[] changes.

Then we don't need MAX_NR_BANKS. We either keep them in sync or kill it.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--