Re: 2.6.23 regression: lpfc_sli.c: off-by-10

[James Smart <James.Smart@Emulex.Com>]

Adrian,

Thanks.

Syntax-wise, it is incorrect. However there's no risk.  The datastructure
its indexing into is a union, and its size is sufficient for the index.
The union supports old and new firmware interfaces. We mistakenly used the
array for the old interface and should have used the (larger) array for
the newer interface.

We're posting a set of fixes later this week and will include the fix for
this.

-- james s


Adrian Bunk wrote:
> The Coverity checker spotted the following off-by-10
> in drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c:
> 
> 
> <--  snip  -->
> 
> ...
> static int
> lpfc_sli_process_unsol_iocb(struct lpfc_hba *phba, struct lpfc_sli_ring *pring,
>                             struct lpfc_iocbq *saveq)
> {
> ...
>                         saveq->context3 = lpfc_sli_replace_hbqbuff(phba,
>                                                 irsp->un.ulpWord[15]);
> ...
> 
> <--  snip  -->
> 
> 
> due to the following code in drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_hw.h:
> 
> 
> <--  snip  -->
> 
> ...
> #define IOCB_WORD_SZ    8
> ...
> typedef struct _IOCB {  /* IOCB structure */
> ...
>                 uint32_t ulpWord[IOCB_WORD_SZ - 2];     /* generic 6 'words' */
> ...
> 
> <--  snip  -->
> 
> 
> cu
> Adrian
>