linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI: Property: Fix type detection of unified integer reading functions

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]

Date:   Fri, 12 Aug 2022 19:42:26 +0000
From:   Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Stefan Binding <sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Cc:     "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        patches@...nsource.cirrus.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] ACPI: Property: Fix type detection of unified integer
 reading functions

Hi Stefan,

On Fri, Aug 12, 2022 at 02:06:45PM +0100, Stefan Binding wrote:
> The current code expects the type of the value to be an integer type,
> instead the value passed to the macro is a pointer.
> Ensure the size comparison uses the correct pointer type to choose the
> max value, instead of using the integer type.
> 
> Fixes: 923044133367 ("ACPI: property: Unify integer value reading functions")
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Binding <sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com>
> ---
>  drivers/acpi/property.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/property.c b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> index 7b3ad8ed2f4e..b1d4a8db89df 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/property.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/property.c
> @@ -1043,10 +1043,10 @@ static int acpi_data_prop_read_single(const struct acpi_device_data *data,
>  				break;					\
>  			}						\
>  			if (__items[i].integer.value > _Generic(__val,	\
> -								u8: U8_MAX, \
> -								u16: U16_MAX, \
> -								u32: U32_MAX, \
> -								u64: U64_MAX, \
> +								u8 *: U8_MAX, \
> +								u16 *: U16_MAX, \
> +								u32 *: U32_MAX, \
> +								u64 *: U64_MAX, \
>  								default: 0U)) { \
>  				ret = -EOVERFLOW;			\
>  				break;					\

Thanks for the patch.

I prefer this fix over the other as it uses the pointer type (rather than
value at a given index). Both have the same effect though.

Reviewed-by: Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>

-- 
Kind regards,

Sakari Ailus