linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] resource: fix an error which walks through iomem resources

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <71104ee7-88e6-aa29-dbb6-a07b66c265c4@redhat.com>
Date:   Wed, 19 Sep 2018 20:58:28 +0800
From:   lijiang <lijiang@...hat.com>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     dan.j.williams@...el.com, thomas.lendacky@....com,
        akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
        baiyaowei@...s.chinamobile.com, tiwai@...e.de, bp@...e.de,
        brijesh.singh@....com, dyoung@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] resource: fix an error which walks through iomem
 resources

Please ignore this patch, i have put this patch into another patches series, you can
refer to the link below:

https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/988431/
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/988432/
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/988433/

Thanks.

在 2018年09月17日 14:20, Lianbo Jiang 写道:
> When we walk through iomem resources by calling walk_iomem_res_desc(), the
> values of the function parameter may be modified in the while loop of __walk
> _iomem_res_desc(), which will cause us to not get the desired result in some
> cases.
> 
> At present, it only restores the original value of res->end, but it doesn't
> restore the original value of res->flags in the while loop of __walk_iomem
> _res_desc(). Whenever the find_next_iomem_res() finds a resource and returns
> the result, the original values of this resource will be modified, which might
> lead to an error in the next loop. For example:
> 
> The original value of resource flags is: res->flags=0x80000200(initial value)
> 
> p->flags   _ 0x81000200 _                _ 0x80000200 _
>           /              \              /              \
> |________|_______A________|____|_....._|______B_________|......___|
> 0                                                                 0xffffffff
>                 (memory address ranges)
> 
> Note: if ((p->flags & res->flags) != res->flags) continue;
> 
> When the resource A is found, the original value of this resource flags will
> be changed to 0x81000200(res->flags=0x81000200), and continue to look for the
> next resource, when the loop reaches resource B, it can not get the resource B
> any more(you can refer to the for loop of find_next_iomem_res()), because the
> value of conditional expression will become true and will also jump the resource
> B. In fact, we should get the resource A and B when we walk through the whole
> tree, but it only gets the resource A, the resource B is missed.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Lianbo Jiang <lijiang@...hat.com>
> ---
>  kernel/resource.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
> index 30e1bc68503b..f5d9fc70a04c 100644
> --- a/kernel/resource.c
> +++ b/kernel/resource.c
> @@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ static int __walk_iomem_res_desc(struct resource *res, unsigned long desc,
>  				 int (*func)(struct resource *, void *))
>  {
>  	u64 orig_end = res->end;
> +	u64 orig_flags = res->flags;
>  	int ret = -1;
>  
>  	while ((res->start < res->end) &&
> @@ -385,6 +386,7 @@ static int __walk_iomem_res_desc(struct resource *res, unsigned long desc,
>  
>  		res->start = res->end + 1;
>  		res->end = orig_end;
> +		res->flags = orig_flags;
>  	}
>  
>  	return ret;
>