Re: [PATCH v5 4/6] x86/microcode/AMD: Check microcode container data in the late loader

Maciej S. Szmigiero
2018-05-03T23:26:59Z

On 03.05.2018 12:01, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2018 at 02:47:39AM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
>> On 01.05.2018 22:03, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 01, 2018 at 06:19:56PM +0200, Maciej S. Szmigiero wrote:
>>>> -EINVAL cast to unsigned int is 4294967274 and this value is also
>>>> a valid count of bytes to skip that this function can return.
>>>
>>> And where exactly in the *old* code do we do that?
>>
>> The old code returned this value as a signed int, but then any
>> "patch_size" value (which is u32) above INT_MAX read from a section header
>> wrapped around to a negative pseudo-error code (which likely didn't match
>> any actual error number).
>
> Lemme repeat my question: *where* *exactly* in the old code do we do that?
>
> Feel free to paste snippets to show what you mean.
>

>From verify_and_add_patch():
> static int verify_and_add_patch(u8 family, u8 *fw, unsigned int leftover)
> {
> struct microcode_header_amd *mc_hdr;
> struct ucode_patch *patch;
> unsigned int patch_size, crnt_size, ret;
> u32 proc_fam;
> u16 proc_id;
>
> patch_size = *(u32 *)(fw + 4);

Here we read a u32 (= unsigned int) value from a section header
and store it into an unsigned int variable.

> crnt_size = patch_size + SECTION_HDR_SIZE;

Here we add 8 (SECTION_HDR_SIZE) to this value and once again store it
into an unsigned int variable.

> mc_hdr = (struct microcode_header_amd *)(fw + SECTION_HDR_SIZE);
> proc_id = mc_hdr->processor_rev_id;
>
> proc_fam = find_cpu_family_by_equiv_cpu(proc_id);
> if (!proc_fam) {
> pr_err("No patch family for equiv ID: 0x%04x\n", proc_id);
> return crnt_size;

Here we return this variable, implicitly converting it into a
(signed) int.
Any value above INT_MAX will wrap around to a negative pseudo-error
code (which might not match any actual error number).

Maciej