[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1375743656.4457.48.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 16:00:56 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fib_trie: remove potential out of bound access
On Mon, 2013-08-05 at 15:41 -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Mon, 05 Aug 2013 11:18:49 -0700
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >
> > AddressSanitizer [1] dynamic checker pointed a potential
> > out of bound access in leaf_walk_rcu()
> >
> > We could allocate one more slot in tnode_new() to leave the prefetch()
> > in-place but it looks not worth the pain.
> >
> > Bug added in commit 82cfbb008572b ("[IPV4] fib_trie: iterator recode")
> >
> > [1] :
> > https://code.google.com/p/address-sanitizer/wiki/AddressSanitizerForKernel
> >
> > Reported-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > Cc: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
>
> Isn't prefetch supposed to always be safe, even out of bounds; even prefetch(NULL).
> Although I really doubt prefetch helps in in this code anyway.
prefetch(...) was not the problem here.
The problem was X = array[N] with N being >= size(array)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists