| Message ID | Y5A7d1E5ccwHTYPf@kadam (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | cdd97383e19d4afe29adc3376025a15ae3bab3a3 |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net,v2] net: mvneta: Fix an out of bounds check | expand |
On Wed, Dec 07, 2022 at 10:06:31AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: > In an earlier commit, I added a bounds check to prevent an out of bounds > read and a WARN(). On further discussion and consideration that check > was probably too aggressive. Instead of returning -EINVAL, a better fix > would be to just prevent the out of bounds read but continue the process. > > Background: The value of "pp->rxq_def" is a number between 0-7 by default, > or even higher depending on the value of "rxq_number", which is a module > parameter. If the value is more than the number of available CPUs then > it will trigger the WARN() in cpu_max_bits_warn(). > > Fixes: e8b4fc13900b ("net: mvneta: Prevent out of bounds read in mvneta_config_rss()") > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com> > --- > v2: fix the subject to say net instead of net-next. > > drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c | 5 +---- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-) > Thanks for the followup, Reviewed-by: Leon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Hello: This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (master) by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>: On Wed, 7 Dec 2022 10:06:31 +0300 you wrote: > In an earlier commit, I added a bounds check to prevent an out of bounds > read and a WARN(). On further discussion and consideration that check > was probably too aggressive. Instead of returning -EINVAL, a better fix > would be to just prevent the out of bounds read but continue the process. > > Background: The value of "pp->rxq_def" is a number between 0-7 by default, > or even higher depending on the value of "rxq_number", which is a module > parameter. If the value is more than the number of available CPUs then > it will trigger the WARN() in cpu_max_bits_warn(). > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [net,v2] net: mvneta: Fix an out of bounds check https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/cdd97383e19d You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c index 66b7f27c9a48..5aefaaff0871 100644 --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c @@ -4271,7 +4271,7 @@ static void mvneta_percpu_elect(struct mvneta_port *pp) /* Use the cpu associated to the rxq when it is online, in all * the other cases, use the cpu 0 which can't be offline. */ - if (cpu_online(pp->rxq_def)) + if (pp->rxq_def < nr_cpu_ids && cpu_online(pp->rxq_def)) elected_cpu = pp->rxq_def; max_cpu = num_present_cpus(); @@ -4927,9 +4927,6 @@ static int mvneta_config_rss(struct mvneta_port *pp) napi_disable(&pp->napi); } - if (pp->indir[0] >= nr_cpu_ids) - return -EINVAL; - pp->rxq_def = pp->indir[0]; /* Update unicast mapping */
In an earlier commit, I added a bounds check to prevent an out of bounds read and a WARN(). On further discussion and consideration that check was probably too aggressive. Instead of returning -EINVAL, a better fix would be to just prevent the out of bounds read but continue the process. Background: The value of "pp->rxq_def" is a number between 0-7 by default, or even higher depending on the value of "rxq_number", which is a module parameter. If the value is more than the number of available CPUs then it will trigger the WARN() in cpu_max_bits_warn(). Fixes: e8b4fc13900b ("net: mvneta: Prevent out of bounds read in mvneta_config_rss()") Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com> --- v2: fix the subject to say net instead of net-next. drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvneta.c | 5 +---- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 4 deletions(-)