linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Record the size of mapped area

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: <20200528132908.GG611145@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 28 May 2020 06:29:08 -0700
From:   Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To:     kan.liang@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David.Laight@...lab.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] perf/x86/intel/uncore: Record the size of mapped
 area

On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 06:15:26AM -0700, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> -	box->io_addr = ioremap(addr, SNB_UNCORE_PCI_IMC_MAP_SIZE);
> +	if (!type->mmio_map_size) {
> +		pr_warn("perf uncore: Cannot ioremap for %s. Size of map area is 0.\n",
> +			type->name);
> +		return;
> +	}

Is that likely that the size is 0?

In any case you have to test the return value of ioremap. So I would rather
test the address for 0 than the size.

Similar in other code below.

I thought you were going to add a range check based on the size to the
actual access. Did I miss it in the patch?

-Andi