linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] RISC-V: Improve init

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: <CAMuHMdWi+wo0+PCR6B1wyXVesG-kL9NQt8XFBuWhZ3SdVUaLZg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 6 Apr 2021 09:19:52 +0200
From:   Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To:     Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>
Cc:     linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] RISC-V: Improve init_resources

Hi Nick,

Thanks for your patch!

On Mon, Apr 5, 2021 at 10:57 AM Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr> wrote:
> * Kernel region is always present and we know where it is, no
> need to look for it inside the loop, just ignore it like the
> rest of the reserved regions within system's memory.
>
> * Don't call memblock_free inside the loop, if called it'll split
> the region of pre-allocated resources in two parts, messing things
> up, just re-use the previous pre-allocated resource and free any
> unused resources after both loops finish.
>
> * memblock_alloc may add a region when called, so increase the
> number of pre-allocated regions by one to be on the safe side
> (reported and patched by Geert Uytterhoeven)
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>

Where does this SoB come from?

> Signed-off-by: Nick Kossifidis <mick@....forth.gr>

> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c

> @@ -129,53 +139,42 @@ static void __init init_resources(void)
>         struct resource *res = NULL;
>         struct resource *mem_res = NULL;
>         size_t mem_res_sz = 0;
> -       int ret = 0, i = 0;
> -
> -       code_res.start = __pa_symbol(_text);
> -       code_res.end = __pa_symbol(_etext) - 1;
> -       code_res.flags = IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
> -
> -       rodata_res.start = __pa_symbol(__start_rodata);
> -       rodata_res.end = __pa_symbol(__end_rodata) - 1;
> -       rodata_res.flags = IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
> -
> -       data_res.start = __pa_symbol(_data);
> -       data_res.end = __pa_symbol(_edata) - 1;
> -       data_res.flags = IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
> +       int num_resources = 0, res_idx = 0;
> +       int ret = 0;
>
> -       bss_res.start = __pa_symbol(__bss_start);
> -       bss_res.end = __pa_symbol(__bss_stop) - 1;
> -       bss_res.flags = IORESOURCE_SYSTEM_RAM | IORESOURCE_BUSY;
> +       /* + 1 as memblock_alloc() might increase memblock.reserved.cnt */
> +       num_resources = memblock.memory.cnt + memblock.reserved.cnt + 1;
> +       res_idx = num_resources - 1;
>
> -       mem_res_sz = (memblock.memory.cnt + memblock.reserved.cnt) * sizeof(*mem_res);

Oh, you incorporated my commit ce989f1472ae350e ("RISC-V: Fix out-of-bounds
accesses in init_resources()") (from v5.12-rc4) into your patch.
Why? This means your patch does not apply against upstream.

> +       mem_res_sz = num_resources * sizeof(*mem_res);
>         mem_res = memblock_alloc(mem_res_sz, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
>         if (!mem_res)
>                 panic("%s: Failed to allocate %zu bytes\n", __func__, mem_res_sz);

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds