linux-kernel - Re:Re:[PATCH 6/6] irq: Potentially 'offset out of size' bug

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1631609290-2830831-1-git-send-email-jiasheng@iscas.ac.cn>
Date:   Tue, 14 Sep 2021 08:48:10 +0000
From:   Jiasheng Jiang <jiasheng@...as.ac.cn>
To:     tglx@...utronix.de
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re:Re:[PATCH 6/6] irq: Potentially 'offset out of size' bug

> On Fri, Sep 10 2021 at 03:26, Jiasheng Jiang wrote:
> The find_next_bit() use nr_irqs as size, and using it without
> any check might cause its returned value out of the sizei

On Fri, Sep 10 2021 at 18:28, tglx wrote:
> Why exactly is this a problem? The return value has to be checked at the
> call site anyway.

There is really a check at the call site, but the annotation of the 
irq_get_next_irq() is 'Returns next irq number after offset or nr_irqs 
if none is found', which tells the programmer should not check the
return value of it. In case of a programmer write a new call for the
irq_get_next_irq(), he may not check the return value because of the 
annotation said. Therefore, it had better to add the check inside of
irq_get_next_irq() to fit for the annotation.

Thanks,

        Jiasheng Jiang