| Message ID | 20210111144648.20498-1-colin.king@canonical.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [next] platform/surface: fix potential integer overflow on shift of a int | expand |
On 1/11/21 3:46 PM, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > The left shift of int 32 bit integer constant 1 is evaluated using 32 bit > arithmetic and then passed as a 64 bit function argument. In the case where > func is 32 or more this can lead to an oveflow. Avoid this by shifting > using the BIT_ULL macro instead. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unintentional integer overflow") > Fixes: fc00bc8ac1da ("platform/surface: Add Surface ACPI Notify driver") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > --- > drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > index 8cd67a669c86..ef9c1f8e8336 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int san_acpi_notify_event(struct device *dev, u64 func, > union acpi_object *obj; > int status = 0; > > - if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, 1 << func)) > + if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, BIT_ULL(func))) > return 0; > > dev_dbg(dev, "notify event %#04llx\n", func); > Thanks, looks good to me. Reviewed-by: Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com> Regards, Max
Hi, On 1/11/21 3:46 PM, Colin King wrote: > From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> > > The left shift of int 32 bit integer constant 1 is evaluated using 32 bit > arithmetic and then passed as a 64 bit function argument. In the case where > func is 32 or more this can lead to an oveflow. Avoid this by shifting > using the BIT_ULL macro instead. > > Addresses-Coverity: ("Unintentional integer overflow") > Fixes: fc00bc8ac1da ("platform/surface: Add Surface ACPI Notify driver") > Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Thank you for your patch, I've applied this patch to my review-hans branch: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/pdx86/platform-drivers-x86.git/log/?h=review-hans Note it will show up in my review-hans branch once I've pushed my local branch there, which might take a while. Once I've run some tests on this branch the patches there will be added to the platform-drivers-x86/for-next branch and eventually will be included in the pdx86 pull-request to Linus for the next merge-window. Regards, Hans > --- > drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > index 8cd67a669c86..ef9c1f8e8336 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c > @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int san_acpi_notify_event(struct device *dev, u64 func, > union acpi_object *obj; > int status = 0; > > - if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, 1 << func)) > + if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, BIT_ULL(func))) > return 0; > > dev_dbg(dev, "notify event %#04llx\n", func); >
diff --git a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c index 8cd67a669c86..ef9c1f8e8336 100644 --- a/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c +++ b/drivers/platform/surface/surface_acpi_notify.c @@ -188,7 +188,7 @@ static int san_acpi_notify_event(struct device *dev, u64 func, union acpi_object *obj; int status = 0; - if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, 1 << func)) + if (!acpi_check_dsm(san, &SAN_DSM_UUID, SAN_DSM_REVISION, BIT_ULL(func))) return 0; dev_dbg(dev, "notify event %#04llx\n", func);