Linux CXL
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Richard Cheng" <icheng@nvidia.com>
Cc: linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] cxl/features: Reject Get Feature count larger than the output buffer
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2026 10:54:07 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260626105407.909B31F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260626104102.53892-2-icheng@nvidia.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Missing bounds checks on user-provided input length in `cxlctl_fw_rpc()` and `cxlctl_set_feature()`, leading to out-of-bounds reads and potential ZERO_SIZE_PTR crashes.
--

commit 1f7098b182e4cdaf480b19545ca818cbf043bd29
Author: Richard Cheng <icheng@nvidia.com>

cxl/features: Reject Get Feature count larger than the output buffer

cxlctl_get_feature() sizes its output buffer from the user's
fwctl_rpc.out_len, but the device is told to write count bytes into
rpc_out->payload. This adds bounds checking against out_size to prevent
overflowing the allocated buffer.

> diff --git a/drivers/cxl/core/features.c b/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> index 85185af46b72d..9c714ee42a411 100644
> --- a/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> +++ b/drivers/cxl/core/features.c
> @@ -471,6 +471,10 @@ static void *cxlctl_get_feature(struct cxl_features_state *cxlfs,
>  	if (!count)
>  		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>  
> +	if (out_size < offsetof(struct fwctl_rpc_cxl_out, payload) ||
> +	    count > out_size - offsetof(struct fwctl_rpc_cxl_out, payload))
> +		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> +

[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but while we are adding bounds checks for
the output buffer here, does cxlctl_fw_rpc() also need to validate the
user-provided in_len?

If the ioctl is called with an in_len of 0, could dereferencing
rpc_in->opcode in cxlctl_fw_rpc() lead to a zero-size pointer crash?

Similarly, in cxlctl_set_feature(), the operation size is calculated without
verifying in_len:

    data_size = rpc_in->op_size - sizeof(feat_in->hdr);

Could a small in_len combined with a large rpc_in->op_size result in an
out-of-bounds read, copying adjacent kernel heap memory into the hardware
mailbox? Would validating in_len against op_size in cxlctl_fw_rpc() prevent
this?

>  	struct fwctl_rpc_cxl_out *rpc_out __free(kvfree) =
>  		kvzalloc(out_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>  	if (!rpc_out)

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260626104102.53892-1-icheng@nvidia.com?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-26 10:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-26 10:40 [PATCH v3 0/3] cxl/features: Bounds-check the fwctl feature commands Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:41 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] cxl/features: Reject Get Feature count larger than the output buffer Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:54   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-06-30  2:50     ` Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:41 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] cxl/features: Reject Set Features output buffer smaller than the header Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:56   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-30  2:51     ` Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:41 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] cxl/features: Clamp Get Feature output size to the remaining buffer Richard Cheng
2026-06-26 10:52   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-30  2:57     ` Richard Cheng

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=20260626105407.909B31F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=icheng@nvidia.com \
    --cc=linux-cxl@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox