linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: boot failure after merge of the dma-mapping tree

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: <20200820154941.GA11349@lst.de>
Date:   Thu, 20 Aug 2020 17:49:41 +0200
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To:     Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
Cc:     Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: boot failure after merge of the dma-mapping tree

On Thu, Aug 20, 2020 at 01:36:17AM -0700, Nicolin Chen wrote:
> Took a quick look -- the boundary_size is seemingly passed from
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/tree/arch/powerpc/kernel/iommu.c#n240
> 
> 	boundary_size = ALIGN(dma_get_seg_boundary(dev) + 1,
> 			1 << tbl->it_page_shift);
> 
> Looks like an overflow happens due to (ULONG_MAX + 1). Should
> we fix here instead (or also)?

Yes, please.  I'll drop the patch again for now, but once we've
got this sorted out I'll readd it.