From: Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH] sgi-xp: fix writing past the end of kzalloc()'d space (v.2)
Date: Wed, 4 Feb 2009 12:36:41 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090204183641.GA24632@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090203120147.dd079ffd.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
A missing type cast results in writing way beyond the end of a kzalloc()'d
memory segment resulting in slab corruption. But it seems like the better
solution is to define ->recv_msg_slots as a 'void *' rather than a
'struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv *' and add the type cast.
Signed-off-by: Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com>
Cc: stable <stable@kernel.org>
---
On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 12:01:47PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Feb 2009 12:23:38 -0600
> Dean Nelson <dcn@sgi.com> wrote:
>
> > --- linux.orig/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c 2009-01-27 10:53:26.000000000 -0600
> > +++ linux/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c 2009-01-28 08:51:57.000000000 -0600
:
> > @@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ xpc_allocate_recv_msg_slot_uv(struct xpc
> > continue;
> >
> > for (entry = 0; entry < nentries; entry++) {
> > - msg_slot = ch_uv->recv_msg_slots + entry *
> > - ch->entry_size;
> > + msg_slot = (struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv *)((u8 *)
> > + ch_uv->recv_msg_slots + entry * ch->entry_size);
>
> So.. ch->entry_size is not equal to sizeof(struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv)?
Correct. The value of ch->entry_size is defined at runtime by the user of
XPC (i.e., XPNET and XPMEM) when it calls xpc_connect(). It is always larger
than sizeof(struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv) which is defined as:
struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv {
struct xpc_notify_mq_msghdr_uv hdr;
unsigned long payload;
};
The payload field reflects the first eight bytes of the user's payload
which extends into the remainder of the messsge slot.
> Perhaps ->recv_msg_slots should never have had type struct
> xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv *?
Agreed. So I'm resubmitting the patch based on this recommendation.
Note that I'm using 'void *' instead of 'u8 *' to ->define recv_msg_slots.
Currently they are equivalent in terms of the math, but 'void *' has the
advantage of not needing to cast at all. Is this an appropriate choice?
Thanks,
Dean
drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc.h | 5 +++--
drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c | 11 +++++------
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
Index: linux/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc.h
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc.h 2009-02-04 09:30:24.000000000 -0600
+++ linux/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc.h 2009-02-04 11:33:48.000000000 -0600
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
* License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
* for more details.
*
- * Copyright (c) 2004-2008 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
+ * Copyright (c) 2004-2009 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*/
/*
@@ -519,7 +519,8 @@ struct xpc_channel_uv {
/* gru mq descriptor */
struct xpc_send_msg_slot_uv *send_msg_slots;
- struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv *recv_msg_slots;
+ void *recv_msg_slots; /* each slot will hold a xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv */
+ /* structure plus the user's payload */
struct xpc_fifo_head_uv msg_slot_free_list;
struct xpc_fifo_head_uv recv_msg_list; /* deliverable payloads */
Index: linux/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c
===================================================================
--- linux.orig/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c 2009-01-27 10:53:26.000000000 -0600
+++ linux/drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c 2009-02-04 11:33:33.000000000 -0600
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
* License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
* for more details.
*
- * Copyright (c) 2008 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
+ * Copyright (c) 2008-2009 Silicon Graphics, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
*/
/*
@@ -1129,8 +1129,8 @@ xpc_allocate_recv_msg_slot_uv(struct xpc
continue;
for (entry = 0; entry < nentries; entry++) {
- msg_slot = ch_uv->recv_msg_slots + entry *
- ch->entry_size;
+ msg_slot = ch_uv->recv_msg_slots +
+ entry * ch->entry_size;
msg_slot->hdr.msg_slot_number = entry;
}
@@ -1438,9 +1438,8 @@ xpc_handle_notify_mq_msg_uv(struct xpc_p
/* we're dealing with a normal message sent via the notify_mq */
ch_uv = &ch->sn.uv;
- msg_slot = (struct xpc_notify_mq_msg_uv *)((u64)ch_uv->recv_msg_slots +
- (msg->hdr.msg_slot_number % ch->remote_nentries) *
- ch->entry_size);
+ msg_slot = ch_uv->recv_msg_slots +
+ (msg->hdr.msg_slot_number % ch->remote_nentries) * ch->entry_size;
BUG_ON(msg->hdr.msg_slot_number != msg_slot->hdr.msg_slot_number);
BUG_ON(msg_slot->hdr.size != 0);
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-04 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-03 18:23 [PATCH] sgi-xp: add type cast to kzalloc()'d space to avoid slab corruption Dean Nelson
2009-02-03 20:01 ` Andrew Morton
2009-02-04 18:36 ` Dean Nelson [this message]
2009-02-04 19:57 ` [PATCH] sgi-xp: fix writing past the end of kzalloc()'d space (v.2) Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090204183641.GA24632@sgi.com \
--to=dcn@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.