netdev - RE: [PATCH] rsi: fix integer overflow warning

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:   Thu, 5 Oct 2017 15:12:05 +0000
From:   David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To:     'Joe Perches' <joe@...ches.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Prameela Rani Garnepudi <prameela.j04cs@...il.com>,
        Amitkumar Karwar <amit.karwar@...pinesignals.com>
CC:     Pavani Muthyala <pavani.muthyala@...pinesignals.com>,
        Karun Eagalapati <karun256@...il.com>,
        "linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] rsi: fix integer overflow warning

From: Joe Perches
> Sent: 05 October 2017 13:19
> On Thu, 2017-10-05 at 14:05 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> > gcc produces a harmless warning about a recently introduced
> > signed integer overflow:
> >
> > drivers/net/wireless/rsi/rsi_91x_hal.c: In function 'rsi_prepare_mgmt_desc':
> > include/uapi/linux/swab.h:13:15: error: integer overflow in expression [-Werror=overflow]
> >   (((__u16)(x) & (__u16)0x00ffU) << 8) |   \
> >    ~~~~~~~~~~~~^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > include/uapi/linux/swab.h:104:2: note: in expansion of macro '___constant_swab16'
> >   ___constant_swab16(x) :   \
> >   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > include/uapi/linux/byteorder/big_endian.h:34:43: note: in expansion of macro '__swab16'
> >  #define __cpu_to_le16(x) ((__force __le16)__swab16((x)))
> 
> []
> 
> > The problem is that the 'mask' value is a signed integer that gets
> > turned into a negative number when truncated to 16 bits. Making it
> > an unsigned constant avoids this.
> 
> I would expect there are more of these.
> 
> Perhaps this define in include/uapi/linux/swab.h:
> 
> #define __swab16(x)				\
> 	(__builtin_constant_p((__u16)(x)) ?	\
> 	___constant_swab16(x) :			\
> 	__fswab16(x))
> 
> should be
> 
> #define __swab16(x)				\
> 	(__builtin_constant_p((__u16)(x)) ?	\
> 	___constant_swab16((__u16)(x)) :	\
> 	__fswab16((__u16)(x)))

You probably don't want the cast in the call to __fswab16() since
that is likely to generate an explicit and with 0xffff.
You will likely also get one if the argument is _u16 (not unsigned int).

	David