From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: [1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem()
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:53:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190417015351.GA28490@agluck-desk> (raw)
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:47:55PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> 229 static void del_elem(struct ce_array *ca, int idx)
> 230 {
> 231 /* Save us a function call when deleting the last element. */
> 232 if (ca->n - (idx + 1))
> 233 memmove((void *)&ca->array[idx],
> 234 (void *)&ca->array[idx + 1],
> 235 (ca->n - (idx + 1)) * sizeof(u64));
> 236
> 237 ca->n--;
> 238 }
>
> idx is ca->n and ca->n is MAX_ELEMS-1, then the above if statement
> becomes true, therefore idx+1 is MAX_ELEMS which is just beyond
> the valid range.
Is that really the memmove() where we die? It looks like
it has a special case for dealing with the last element.
But this:
296 ret = find_elem(ca, pfn, &to);
297 if (ret < 0) {
298 /*
299 * Shift range [to-end] to make room for one more element.
300 */
301 memmove((void *)&ca->array[to + 1],
302 (void *)&ca->array[to],
303 (ca->n - to) * sizeof(u64));
304
looks like it also needs a special case for when "to == MAX_ELEMS-1"
(we don't need to memmove).
-Tony
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-edac@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem()
Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 18:53:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190417015351.GA28490@agluck-desk> (raw)
Message-ID: <20190417015351.FuOh6mrCtmH-tThkLtv7wFKA2fqO2aPsZ8noJbmdIXY@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpXBJ2eAz4TW_GmOWRLrkyJcO=u-8VSnmv91ZABG-21Agg@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Apr 16, 2019 at 04:47:55PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> 229 static void del_elem(struct ce_array *ca, int idx)
> 230 {
> 231 /* Save us a function call when deleting the last element. */
> 232 if (ca->n - (idx + 1))
> 233 memmove((void *)&ca->array[idx],
> 234 (void *)&ca->array[idx + 1],
> 235 (ca->n - (idx + 1)) * sizeof(u64));
> 236
> 237 ca->n--;
> 238 }
>
> idx is ca->n and ca->n is MAX_ELEMS-1, then the above if statement
> becomes true, therefore idx+1 is MAX_ELEMS which is just beyond
> the valid range.
Is that really the memmove() where we die? It looks like
it has a special case for dealing with the last element.
But this:
296 ret = find_elem(ca, pfn, &to);
297 if (ret < 0) {
298 /*
299 * Shift range [to-end] to make room for one more element.
300 */
301 memmove((void *)&ca->array[to + 1],
302 (void *)&ca->array[to],
303 (ca->n - to) * sizeof(u64));
304
looks like it also needs a special case for when "to == MAX_ELEMS-1"
(we don't need to memmove).
-Tony
next reply other threads:[~2019-04-17 1:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-17 1:53 Luck, Tony [this message]
2019-04-17 1:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem() Luck, Tony
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2019-04-18 22:54 [1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-18 22:54 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-17 21:15 [1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-17 21:15 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-17 2:37 [1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-17 2:37 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-17 2:31 [1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-17 2:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 23:47 [1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 23:47 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 23:28 [1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-16 23:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-16 23:18 [1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 23:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 22:18 [1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-16 22:18 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Luck, Tony
2019-04-16 18:06 [2/2] ras: close the race condition with timer Cong Wang
2019-04-16 18:06 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 18:00 [2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 18:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 17:42 [2/2] " Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 17:42 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 17:09 [2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 17:09 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 17:01 [1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem() Cong Wang
2019-04-16 17:01 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 9:58 [2/2] ras: close the race condition with timer Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 9:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 9:07 [1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem() Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 9:07 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Borislav Petkov
2019-04-16 1:20 [2/2] ras: close the race condition with timer Cong Wang
2019-04-16 1:20 ` [PATCH 2/2] " Cong Wang
2019-04-16 1:20 [1/2] ras: fix an off-by-one error in __find_elem() Cong Wang
2019-04-16 1:20 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Cong Wang
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=20190417015351.GA28490@agluck-desk \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=linux-edac@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/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.