Re: [PATCH] ACPI/PPTT: fix off-by-one error

Rafael J. Wysocki
2025-05-07T15:42:24Z

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 5:25 PM Jeremy Linton <jeremy.linton@arm.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 5/6/25 8:13 AM, Heyne, Maximilian wrote:
> > Commit 7ab4f0e37a0f ("ACPI PPTT: Fix coding mistakes in a couple of
> > sizeof() calls") corrects the processer entry size but unmasked a longer
> > standing bug where the last entry in the structure can get skipped due
> > to an off-by-one mistake if the last entry ends exactly at the end of
> > the ACPI subtable.
> >
> > The error manifests for instance on EC2 Graviton Metal instances with
> >
> > ACPI PPTT: PPTT table found, but unable to locate core 63 (63)
> > [...]
> > ACPI: SPE must be homogeneous
> >
> > Fixes: 2bd00bcd73e5 ("ACPI/PPTT: Add Processor Properties Topology Table parsing")
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Maximilian Heyne <mheyne@amazon.de>
> > ---
> > drivers/acpi/pptt.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> > index f73ce6e13065d..4364da90902e5 100644
> > --- a/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> > +++ b/drivers/acpi/pptt.c
> > @@ -231,7 +231,7 @@ static int acpi_pptt_leaf_node(struct acpi_table_header *table_hdr,
> > sizeof(struct acpi_table_pptt));
> > proc_sz = sizeof(struct acpi_pptt_processor);
>
> This isn't really right, it should be struct acpi_subtable_header, then
> once the header is safe, pull the length from it.
>
> But then, really if we are trying to fix the original bug that the table
> could be shorter than the data in it suggests, the struct
> acpi_pptt_processor length plus its resources needs to be checked once
> the subtype is known to be a processor node.
>
> Otherwise the original sizeof * change isn't really fixing anything.

Sorry, what sense did it make to do

proc_sz = sizeof(struct acpi_pptt_processor *);

here? As much as proc_sz = 0 I suppose?

> >
> > - while ((unsigned long)entry + proc_sz < table_end) {
> > + while ((unsigned long)entry + proc_sz <= table_end) {
> > cpu_node = (struct acpi_pptt_processor *)entry;
> > if (entry->type == ACPI_PPTT_TYPE_PROCESSOR &&

And this checks if the current entry is a CPU one and goes to the next
one otherwise, so it clearly looks for a CPU entry.

So the size check is logically correct now: It checks if there's
enough space in the table to hold a CPU entry that's being looked for.
The only problem with it is the assumption that the size of a CPU
entry must be greater than sizeof(struct acpi_pptt_processor).

Previously, it didn't make sense at all.

> > cpu_node->parent == node_entry)
> > @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ static struct acpi_pptt_processor *acpi_find_processor_node(struct acpi_table_he
> > proc_sz = sizeof(struct acpi_pptt_processor);
> >
> > /* find the processor structure associated with this cpuid */
> > - while ((unsigned long)entry + proc_sz < table_end) {
> > + while ((unsigned long)entry + proc_sz <= table_end) {
> > cpu_node = (struct acpi_pptt_processor *)entry;
> >
> > if (entry->length == 0) {