From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756072Ab1KDROs (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:14:48 -0400 Received: from cantor2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:44127 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755915Ab1KDROr (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Nov 2011 13:14:47 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 Nov 2011 10:14:26 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Ben Hutchings Cc: Dan Carpenter , Xiaotian Feng , Jens Axboe , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Subject: Re: [050/107] block: check for proper length of iov entries earlier in blk_rq_map_user_iov() Message-ID: <20111104171425.GA4893@suse.de> References: <20111102221600.GA26650@kroah.com> <20111102221454.703920975@clark.kroah.org> <1320420256.3079.172.camel@deadeye> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1320420256.3079.172.camel@deadeye> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 03:24:16PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2011-11-02 at 15:14 -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > 2.6.32-longterm review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. > > > > ------------------ > > > > From: Xiaotian Feng > > > > commit 5478755616ae2ef1ce144dded589b62b2a50d575 upstream. > > > > commit 9284bcf checks for proper length of iov entries in > > blk_rq_map_user_iov(). But if the map is unaligned, kernel > > will break out the loop without checking for the proper length. > > So we need to check the proper length before the unalign check. > > This will catch an unaligned zero-length entry. But there's still no > check for zero-length iov entries *after* the unaligned entry. > > [...] > > --- a/block/blk-map.c > > +++ b/block/blk-map.c > > @@ -201,12 +201,13 @@ int blk_rq_map_user_iov(struct request_q > > for (i = 0; i < iov_count; i++) { > > unsigned long uaddr = (unsigned long)iov[i].iov_base; > > > > + if (!iov[i].iov_len) > > + return -EINVAL; > > + > > if (uaddr & queue_dma_alignment(q)) { > > unaligned = 1; > > break; > > I think the correct fix is just to remove the 'break'. Then the fix should go upstream first :) thanks, greg k-h