* [patch] dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
@ 2014-10-21 12:43 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2014-10-21 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alasdair Kergon
Cc: Mike Snitzer, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid, kernel-janitors
"sb" is a dm_raid_superblock struct pointer so the pointer math doesn't
work and we will end up corrupting memory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
index b802644..a7cb9dd 100644
--- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
+++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
@@ -826,7 +826,7 @@ static void super_sync(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
test_bit(Faulty, &(rs->dev[i].rdev.flags)))
failed_devices |= (1ULL << i);
- memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
+ memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [patch] dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
@ 2014-10-21 12:43 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2014-10-21 12:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alasdair Kergon
Cc: Mike Snitzer, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid, kernel-janitors
"sb" is a dm_raid_superblock struct pointer so the pointer math doesn't
work and we will end up corrupting memory.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
index b802644..a7cb9dd 100644
--- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
+++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
@@ -826,7 +826,7 @@ static void super_sync(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
test_bit(Faulty, &(rs->dev[i].rdev.flags)))
failed_devices |= (1ULL << i);
- memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
+ memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
2014-10-21 12:43 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2014-10-21 12:48 ` Mike Snitzer
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mike Snitzer @ 2014-10-21 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Alasdair Kergon, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid,
kernel-janitors, Heinz Mauelshagen
On Tue, Oct 21 2014 at 8:43am -0400,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> "sb" is a dm_raid_superblock struct pointer so the pointer math doesn't
> work and we will end up corrupting memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> index b802644..a7cb9dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> @@ -826,7 +826,7 @@ static void super_sync(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
> test_bit(Faulty, &(rs->dev[i].rdev.flags)))
> failed_devices |= (1ULL << i);
>
> - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
>
> sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
problem.
Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
@ 2014-10-21 12:48 ` Mike Snitzer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mike Snitzer @ 2014-10-21 12:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Alasdair Kergon, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid,
kernel-janitors, Heinz Mauelshagen
On Tue, Oct 21 2014 at 8:43am -0400,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> "sb" is a dm_raid_superblock struct pointer so the pointer math doesn't
> work and we will end up corrupting memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> index b802644..a7cb9dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> +++ b/drivers/md/dm-raid.c
> @@ -826,7 +826,7 @@ static void super_sync(struct mddev *mddev, struct md_rdev *rdev)
> test_bit(Faulty, &(rs->dev[i].rdev.flags)))
> failed_devices |= (1ULL << i);
>
> - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
>
> sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
problem.
Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
2014-10-21 12:48 ` Mike Snitzer
@ 2014-10-21 12:57 ` Dan Carpenter
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2014-10-21 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Snitzer
Cc: Alasdair Kergon, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid,
kernel-janitors, Heinz Mauelshagen
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:48:26AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> >
> > sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> > sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
>
> Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
> problem.
>
> Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
> intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
It's pointer math.
sizeof(*sb) is 512.
"sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 512 * 512.
"sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 512.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
@ 2014-10-21 12:57 ` Dan Carpenter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2014-10-21 12:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Mike Snitzer
Cc: Alasdair Kergon, dm-devel, Neil Brown, linux-raid,
kernel-janitors, Heinz Mauelshagen
On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:48:26AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> >
> > sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> > sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
>
> Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
> problem.
>
> Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
> intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
It's pointer math.
sizeof(*sb) is 512.
"sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 512 * 512.
"sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 512.
regards,
dan carpenter
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
2014-10-21 12:57 ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2014-10-21 13:25 ` Mike Snitzer
-1 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mike Snitzer @ 2014-10-21 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Heinz Mauelshagen, kernel-janitors, linux-raid, dm-devel,
Alasdair Kergon
On Tue, Oct 21 2014 at 8:57am -0400,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:48:26AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > > + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > >
> > > sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> > > sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
> >
> > Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
> > problem.
> >
> > Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
> > intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
>
> It's pointer math.
Yes, I see that now..
> sizeof(*sb) is 512.
>
> "sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 512 * 512.
> "sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 512.
Actually, Heinz removed the 452 bytes of padding from struct
dm_raid_superblock, so it is more like:
sizeof(*sb) == sizeof(struct dm_raid_super_block) == 60
"sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 60 * 60
"sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 60.
But regardless, your broader point on the math stands. I'll get this
fixed up, thanks!
Mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync()
@ 2014-10-21 13:25 ` Mike Snitzer
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Mike Snitzer @ 2014-10-21 13:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dan Carpenter
Cc: Heinz Mauelshagen, kernel-janitors, linux-raid, dm-devel,
Alasdair Kergon
On Tue, Oct 21 2014 at 8:57am -0400,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 21, 2014 at 08:48:26AM -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote:
> > > - memset(sb + sizeof(*sb), 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > > + memset(sb + 1, 0, rdev->sb_size - sizeof(*sb));
> > >
> > > sb->magic = cpu_to_le32(DM_RAID_MAGIC);
> > > sb->features = cpu_to_le32(0); /* No features yet */
> >
> > Not following... sizeof(*sb) != sizeof(sb). So I'm not seeing a
> > problem.
> >
> > Nor am I seeing how you think sb + 1 is equivalent to what Heinz
> > intended (zero the memory following the sizeof(struct dm_raid_superblock)).
>
> It's pointer math.
Yes, I see that now..
> sizeof(*sb) is 512.
>
> "sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 512 * 512.
> "sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 512.
Actually, Heinz removed the 452 bytes of padding from struct
dm_raid_superblock, so it is more like:
sizeof(*sb) = sizeof(struct dm_raid_super_block) = 60
"sb + sizeof(*sb)" is the same as (void *)sb + 60 * 60
"sb + 1" is the same as (void *)sb + 60.
But regardless, your broader point on the math stands. I'll get this
fixed up, thanks!
Mike
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2014-10-21 13:25 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2014-10-21 12:43 [patch] dm raid: pointer math issue in super_sync() Dan Carpenter
2014-10-21 12:43 ` Dan Carpenter
2014-10-21 12:48 ` Mike Snitzer
2014-10-21 12:48 ` Mike Snitzer
2014-10-21 12:57 ` Dan Carpenter
2014-10-21 12:57 ` Dan Carpenter
2014-10-21 13:25 ` Mike Snitzer
2014-10-21 13:25 ` Mike Snitzer
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.