From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD1FFE7734B for ; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 23:06:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229769AbjI2XGT (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2023 19:06:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50332 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229508AbjI2XGT (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Sep 2023 19:06:19 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x536.google.com (mail-pg1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::536]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04A2CE5; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:06:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x536.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-5855333fbadso3430328a12.1; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:06:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1696028776; x=1696633576; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=JS8hWFdIolHgfI50iM7ndmrsQjVMPHZC5aONoPIyZAA=; b=CfBKlmgl+KVpyJDrsWOB29yivHL+JR8WDNZoXy8VesIGsC3yzGCeQfEEJQNyI2wSt1 3v1TocjqXfHi9HxlO+zEQwJeAqORp/c5ustAbh6HVvdSlIDBk291jmvVnRK5JCXg8yjs nb0EDkhJZZ0Th8UrcPv6gy3YKdsU+/qFTUqta+OJ89DC5yZ5SbFMNAhtt5UiosbY9Q9t Pb9wOZAC1L6dyRPO6m6wDZKvGFjOMzvv5FiyVBlQ/YhQZk8ZSKyxWeGFJuVW/UjbKFvZ ok/18fGRxnWxpovVpluH9Fb4gf0AAxCWkDfmxvMtQnndyN6OTPAJsae7RJp9vPNWhgRb 5/Og== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1696028776; x=1696633576; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=JS8hWFdIolHgfI50iM7ndmrsQjVMPHZC5aONoPIyZAA=; b=JdnGEY52qwSCFB5kGpo5Je8WeVo+mmhV5iCnntLF4Udm34KB5tSeaGBAZYWP2OURrM V0HTE4Gb2EeRYIklJ2lrSvlydrUQ3v9hAXHcqgXPnfFkdnkW3BZqW/NsGnXmDQ2OZ3qd Wz+a3xwvCcDgZZ5/2litmvrZjQfDVy3xdSlBW0/I5eK7GFA77fFDn9ToW7qUwhosGOZR lOcpuwT43VC+bU9sRHNcQvD185YlfD+M+42l8nwBaL4iol8w1Ql4269T+BKC2orqkZ6z GH3Xt09KCy3X8nEvBwGIjArlUzkKPxa9kY5gNlMfJv8foG8NtIjahg4zMLlK4O5eTJaE 1DeA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yytgz5Keu+GcXe0pRCHTPX4flqx5L0bbCuVIFTY8gwL7OrKWiXE ShEgNfE7SCdjMd1mMg/bpGQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFfV8wZh0MisNVzSqo3/Gyg2t0pUDH20dbx9PffJOXhqMoMkk633+SsFUvK1DyB9oSWjLjjtw== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:f697:b0:277:298:deae with SMTP id cl23-20020a17090af69700b002770298deaemr5133437pjb.11.1696028776410; Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:06:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pek-lxu-l1.wrs.com ([36.129.58.185]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id t9-20020a17090a5d8900b002630c9d78aasm1967024pji.5.2023.09.29.16.06.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 29 Sep 2023 16:06:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Edward AD To: alexghiti@rivosinc.com Cc: alex@ghiti.fr, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, conor@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, guoren@kernel.org, jirislaby@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, liushixin2@huawei.com, palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com, syzbot+8d2757d62d403b2d9275@syzkaller.appspotmail.com, syzkaller-bugs@googlegroups.com, twuufnxlz@gmail.com Subject: [PATCH] Test for riscv fixes Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2023 07:05:49 +0800 Message-ID: <20230929230549.45206-2-twuufnxlz@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.42.0 In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-serial@vger.kernel.org Hi Alexandre, On Fri, 29 Sep 2023 10:25:59 +0200 Alexandre Ghiti wrote: > I'm still not convinced this will fix the kasan out-of-bounds > accesses, the page can be valid but the read can happen at an offset > not initialized and trigger such errors right? I still think there is > something weird about the stack frame, as to me this should not happen > (but admittedly I don't know much about that). The added check can confirm that the physical page is invalid (whether it is a vmalloc allocated page or a slab allocated page), and exit the for loop when it is invalid. Perhaps we can trust the test results of syzbot. Thanks, edward