linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] arm: kgdb: fix NUMREGBYTES so that gdb

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: <eae3e959-60cb-a8cc-be97-f782d0c96f08@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 6 Apr 2018 14:49:22 +0100
From:   Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>
To:     David Rivshin <drivshin@...rd.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        kgdb-bugreport@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@...driver.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Rabin Vincent <rabin@....in>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: kgdb: fix NUMREGBYTES so that gdb_regs[] is the
 correct size

On 06/04/18 14:25, Daniel Thompson wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 04:09:16PM -0400, David Rivshin wrote:
>> From: David Rivshin <DRivshin@...worx.com>
>>
>> NUMREGBYTES (which is used as the size for gdb_regs[]) is incorrectly based
>> on DBG_MAX_REG_NUM instead of GDB_MAX_REGS. DBG_MAX_REG_NUM is the number
>> of total registers, while GDB_MAX_REGS is the number of 'unsigned longs'
>> it takes to serialize those registers. Since FP registers require 3
>> 'unsigned longs' each, DBG_MAX_REG_NUM is smaller than GDB_MAX_REGS.
>>
>> This causes GDB 8.0 give the following error on connect:
>> "Truncated register 19 in remote 'g' packet"
>>
>> This also causes the register serialization/deserialization logic to
>> overflow gdb_regs[], overwriting whatever follows.
>>
>> Fixes: 834b2964b7ab ("kgdb,arm: fix register dump")
>> Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 2.6.37+
>> Signed-off-by: David Rivshin <drivshin@...worx.com>
> 
> I pointed some trivial autotests at both gdb-7.12 and gdb-8.0. Results
> look good to me!
> 
> Tested-by: Daniel Thompson <daniel.thompson@...aro.org>

BTW I noticed that myself and Jason in the only "real people" in
To: . Most arch specific patches end up making their way upstream via 
the arch maintainer rather than via the kgdb tree so personally I would 
choose to the arch maintainers in the To: field as well.

I certainly think you will have to follow up via Russell King's patch 
tracker once you think its had enough time on the ML for review.


Daniel.


> 
>> ---
>>   arch/arm/include/asm/kgdb.h | 2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/kgdb.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/kgdb.h
>> index 3b73fdcf3627a..8de1100d10674 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/kgdb.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/kgdb.h
>> @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ extern int kgdb_fault_expected;
>>   
>>   #define KGDB_MAX_NO_CPUS	1
>>   #define BUFMAX			400
>> -#define NUMREGBYTES		(DBG_MAX_REG_NUM << 2)
>> +#define NUMREGBYTES		(GDB_MAX_REGS << 2)
>>   #define NUMCRITREGBYTES		(32 << 2)
>>   
>>   #define _R0			0
>>
>> base-commit: 0adb32858b0bddf4ada5f364a84ed60b196dbcda
>> -- 
>> 2.14.3
>>