linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v1 RESEND] EDAC/bluefield

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:
 <PH7PR12MB590228EA57AE7A66870E373FC7462@PH7PR12MB5902.namprd12.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 17:30:49 +0000
From: David Thompson <davthompson@...dia.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>, "james.morse@....com"
	<james.morse@....com>, "mchehab@...nel.org" <mchehab@...nel.org>,
	"rric@...nel.org" <rric@...nel.org>, "linux-edac@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-edac@...r.kernel.org>, Shravan Ramani <shravankr@...dia.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 RESEND] EDAC/bluefield - fix potential integer overflow

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2024 12:50 PM
> To: David Thompson <davthompson@...dia.com>
> Cc: tony.luck@...el.com; james.morse@....com; mchehab@...nel.org;
> rric@...nel.org; linux-edac@...r.kernel.org; Shravan Ramani
> <shravankr@...dia.com>; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 RESEND] EDAC/bluefield - fix potential integer overflow
> 
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 11:10:56AM -0400, David Thompson wrote:
> > The 64-bit argument for the "get DIMM info" SMC call consists of
> > "mem_ctrl_idx" left-shifted 16 bits and OR-ed with DIMM index.
> > With "mem_ctrl_idx" defined as 32-bits wide the left-shift operation
> > truncates the upper 16 bits of information during the calculation of
> > the SMC argument. The "mem_ctrl_idx" stack variable must be defined as
> > 64-bits wide to prevent any potential integer overflow, i.e. loss of
> > data from upper 16 bits.
> >
> > Fixes: 82413e562ea6 ("EDAC, mellanox: Add ECC support for BlueField
> > DDR4")
> > Reviewed-by: Shravan Kumar Ramani <shravankr@...dia.com>
> > Signed-off-by: David Thompson <davthompson@...dia.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/edac/bluefield_edac.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/edac/bluefield_edac.c
> > b/drivers/edac/bluefield_edac.c index 5b3164560648..0e539c107351
> > 100644
> > --- a/drivers/edac/bluefield_edac.c
> > +++ b/drivers/edac/bluefield_edac.c
> > @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static void bluefield_edac_check(struct
> > mem_ctl_info *mci)  static void bluefield_edac_init_dimms(struct
> > mem_ctl_info *mci)  {
> >  	struct bluefield_edac_priv *priv = mci->pvt_info;
> > -	int mem_ctrl_idx = mci->mc_idx;
> > +	u64 mem_ctrl_idx = mci->mc_idx;
> >  	struct dimm_info *dimm;
> >  	u64 smc_info, smc_arg;
> >  	int is_empty = 1, i;
> > --
> 
> Is this something you're hitting in real workloads so that it needs to go to stable or
> is it rather something caught through code review or so?
> 

Hi Boris,

This patch addresses an issue that was raised during a scan by Coverity (static code analyzer).
I don't believe we have evidence that it will be hit with real workloads.

Regards, Dave

> Thx.
> 
> --
> Regards/Gruss,
>     Boris.
> 
> https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette