[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240510004906.GU2118490@ZenIV>
Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 01:49:06 +0100
From: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
To: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@...gle.com>
Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@...gle.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, llvm@...ts.linux.dev,
linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] libfs: fix accidental overflow in offset calculation
On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 12:35:51AM +0000, Justin Stitt wrote:
> @@ -147,7 +147,9 @@ loff_t dcache_dir_lseek(struct file *file, loff_t offset, int whence)
> struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry;
> switch (whence) {
> case 1:
> - offset += file->f_pos;
> + /* cannot represent offset with loff_t */
> + if (check_add_overflow(offset, file->f_pos, &offset))
> + return -EOVERFLOW;
Instead of -EINVAL it correctly returns in such cases? Why?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists