[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180516224641.GA31929@pd.tnic>
Date: Thu, 17 May 2018 00:46:41 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>
To: Johannes Hirte <johannes.hirte@...enkhaos.de>,
"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 3/3] x86/MCE/AMD: Get address from already initialized
block
On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 11:39:54AM +0200, Johannes Hirte wrote:
> The out-of-bound access happens in get_block_address:
>
> if (bankp && bankp->blocks) {
> struct threshold_block *blockp blockp = &bankp->blocks[block];
>
> with block=1. This doesn't exists. I don't even find any array here.
> There is a linked list, created in allocate_threshold_blocks. On my
> system I get 17 lists with one element each.
Yes, what a mess this is. ;-\
There's no such thing as ->blocks[block] array. We assign simply the
threshold_block to it in allocate_threshold_blocks:
per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks = b;
And I can't say the design of this thing is really friendly but it is
still no excuse that I missed that during review. Grrr.
So, Yazen, what really needs to happen here is to iterate the
bank->blocks->miscj list to find the block you're looking for and return
its address, the opposite to this here:
if (per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks) {
list_add(&b->miscj,
&per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks->miscj);
} else {
per_cpu(threshold_banks, cpu)[bank]->blocks = b;
}
and don't forget to look at ->blocks itself.
And then you need to make sure that searching for block addresses still
works when resuming from suspend so that you can avoid the RDMSR IPIs.
Ok?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)
--
Powered by blists - more mailing lists