linux-kernel - Re: [GIT pull] x86/irq for v5.18-rc1

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: <alpine.DEB.2.21.2203301406450.22465@angie.orcam.me.uk>
Date:   Thu, 31 Mar 2022 08:11:55 +0100 (BST)
From:   "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@...am.me.uk>
To:     Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <dmitry.osipenko@...labora.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [GIT pull] x86/irq for v5.18-rc1

On Mon, 21 Mar 2022, Linus Torvalds wrote:

> >  - Handle the IRT routing table format in AMI BIOSes correctly
> 
> *Very* minor nit here in the hope of future cleanups: the other x86
> irq routing table structions (Christ, that's a sentence that shouldn't
> exist in a sane world) use "__attribute__((packed))" and this one uses
> "__packed".

 I have reviewed and reverified the code for resubmission now and frankly 
I don't know where this "__packed" artefact has come from.  I certainly 
have "__attribute__((packed))" in all my copies of the change including 
one I have submitted (though `checkpatch.pl' does want it indeed to be 
`__packed' instead).

 Also accessing memory beyond __va(0x100000) does not appear to crash on 
my 32-bit x86 machine, so it must be something specific to x86-64.  Not an 
excuse for a range overrun of course, but still odd (and as I previously 
mentioned I find it odd too that this code is ever run for x86-64 in the 
first place).

 Finally, following your suggestion I have added verification for a range 
overrun for the whole table for both the existing $PIR format and the new 
$IRT format.  It isn't a big deal and we shouldn't trust external sources 
of data.

  Maciej