* [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch
@ 2025-07-01 5:40 Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:40 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning " Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue " Greg KH
0 siblings, 2 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Akshay Gupta @ 2025-07-01 5:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: gregkh, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy, mario.limonciello,
naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji, Akshay Gupta,
Dan Carpenter
Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
checker warning:
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->cpu_in_out << 32'
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->mcamsr_in_out << 32'
CPUID thread data from input is available at byte 4 & 5, this
patch fixes to copy the user data correctly in the argument.
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
---
Changes from v1:
- Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
index b653a21a909e..3570f3b269a9 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
@@ -42,7 +42,6 @@
#define RD_MCA_CMD 0x86
/* CPUID MCAMSR mask & index */
-#define CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
#define CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX 32
#define CPUID_MCA_FUNC_MASK GENMASK(31, 0)
#define CPUID_EXT_FUNC_INDEX 56
@@ -129,7 +128,7 @@ static int rmi_cpuid_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
goto exit_unlock;
}
- thread = msg->cpu_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
+ thread = msg->cpu_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
/* Thread > 127, Thread128 CS register, 1'b1 needs to be set to 1 */
if (thread > 127) {
@@ -210,7 +209,7 @@ static int rmi_mca_msr_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
goto exit_unlock;
}
- thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
+ thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
/* Thread > 127, Thread128 CS register, 1'b1 needs to be set to 1 */
if (thread > 127) {
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning reported in smatch
2025-07-01 5:40 [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch Akshay Gupta
@ 2025-07-01 5:40 ` Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:49 ` Greg KH
2025-07-01 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue " Greg KH
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Akshay Gupta @ 2025-07-01 5:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Cc: gregkh, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy, mario.limonciello,
naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji, Akshay Gupta,
Dan Carpenter
Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
checker warning:
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:376 apml_rmi_reg_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:394 apml_mailbox_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:411 apml_cpuid_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:428 apml_mcamsr_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
copy_to/from_user() returns number of bytes, not copied.
In case data not copied, return "-EFAULT".
Additionally, fixes the "-EPROTOTYPE" error return as intended.
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
---
Changes from v2:
- Update commit message to add, "fix the -EPROTOTYPE error return".
Changes from v1:
- Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 15 +++++++++++----
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
index 3570f3b269a9..9048517c088c 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
@@ -372,7 +372,8 @@ static int apml_rmi_reg_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data,
mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
if (msg.rflag && !ret)
- return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg));
+ if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg)))
+ return -EFAULT;
return ret;
}
@@ -390,7 +391,9 @@ static int apml_mailbox_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data, struct apml_mbox_msg __use
if (ret && ret != -EPROTOTYPE)
return ret;
- return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_mbox_msg));
+ if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_mbox_msg)))
+ return -EFAULT;
+ return ret;
}
static int apml_cpuid_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data, struct apml_cpuid_msg __user *arg)
@@ -407,7 +410,9 @@ static int apml_cpuid_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data, struct apml_cpuid_msg __user
if (ret && ret != -EPROTOTYPE)
return ret;
- return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_cpuid_msg));
+ if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_cpuid_msg)))
+ return -EFAULT;
+ return ret;
}
static int apml_mcamsr_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data, struct apml_mcamsr_msg __user *arg)
@@ -424,7 +429,9 @@ static int apml_mcamsr_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data, struct apml_mcamsr_msg __us
if (ret && ret != -EPROTOTYPE)
return ret;
- return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_mcamsr_msg));
+ if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_mcamsr_msg)))
+ return -EFAULT;
+ return ret;
}
static long sbrmi_ioctl(struct file *fp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
--
2.25.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch
2025-07-01 5:40 [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:40 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning " Akshay Gupta
@ 2025-07-01 5:49 ` Greg KH
2025-07-01 9:15 ` Gupta, Akshay
1 sibling, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2025-07-01 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Akshay Gupta
Cc: linux-kernel, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy,
mario.limonciello, naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji,
Dan Carpenter
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:40:40AM +0000, Akshay Gupta wrote:
> Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
>
> Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
> from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
> checker warning:
>
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->cpu_in_out << 32'
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->mcamsr_in_out << 32'
>
> CPUID thread data from input is available at byte 4 & 5, this
> patch fixes to copy the user data correctly in the argument.
>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
> Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
> ---
> Changes from v1:
> - Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
>
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 5 ++---
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> index b653a21a909e..3570f3b269a9 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> @@ -42,7 +42,6 @@
> #define RD_MCA_CMD 0x86
>
> /* CPUID MCAMSR mask & index */
> -#define CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
> #define CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX 32
> #define CPUID_MCA_FUNC_MASK GENMASK(31, 0)
> #define CPUID_EXT_FUNC_INDEX 56
> @@ -129,7 +128,7 @@ static int rmi_cpuid_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
> goto exit_unlock;
> }
>
> - thread = msg->cpu_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
> + thread = msg->cpu_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
So this takes a u64 and just moves it over 32 bits and then does what?
I guess it makes sense but how did the original code ever work at all?
>
> /* Thread > 127, Thread128 CS register, 1'b1 needs to be set to 1 */
> if (thread > 127) {
> @@ -210,7 +209,7 @@ static int rmi_mca_msr_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
> goto exit_unlock;
> }
>
> - thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
> + thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
Same here, was the original code just wrong?
And if this wrong, should this get a fixes: line?
thanks,
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning reported in smatch
2025-07-01 5:40 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning " Akshay Gupta
@ 2025-07-01 5:49 ` Greg KH
2025-07-01 9:16 ` Gupta, Akshay
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2025-07-01 5:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Akshay Gupta
Cc: linux-kernel, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy,
mario.limonciello, naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji,
Dan Carpenter
On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:40:41AM +0000, Akshay Gupta wrote:
> Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
>
> Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
> from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
> checker warning:
>
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:376 apml_rmi_reg_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:394 apml_mailbox_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:411 apml_cpuid_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:428 apml_mcamsr_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
>
> copy_to/from_user() returns number of bytes, not copied.
> In case data not copied, return "-EFAULT".
> Additionally, fixes the "-EPROTOTYPE" error return as intended.
>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
> Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
> Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
> ---
> Changes from v2:
> - Update commit message to add, "fix the -EPROTOTYPE error return".
>
> Changes from v1:
> - Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
>
> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 15 +++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> index 3570f3b269a9..9048517c088c 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
> @@ -372,7 +372,8 @@ static int apml_rmi_reg_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data,
> mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
>
> if (msg.rflag && !ret)
> - return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg));
> + if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg)))
> + return -EFAULT;
> return ret;
What commit id does this change fix?
thanks,
greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch
2025-07-01 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue " Greg KH
@ 2025-07-01 9:15 ` Gupta, Akshay
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gupta, Akshay @ 2025-07-01 9:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH
Cc: linux-kernel, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy,
mario.limonciello, naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji,
Dan Carpenter
On 7/1/2025 11:19 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:40:40AM +0000, Akshay Gupta wrote:
>> Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
>>
>> Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
>> from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
>> checker warning:
>>
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:132 rmi_cpuid_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->cpu_in_out << 32'
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: bitwise OR is zero '0xffffffff00000000 & 0xffff'
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:213 rmi_mca_msr_read() warn: potential integer overflow from user 'msg->mcamsr_in_out << 32'
>>
>> CPUID thread data from input is available at byte 4 & 5, this
>> patch fixes to copy the user data correctly in the argument.
>>
>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
>> Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
>> ---
>> Changes from v1:
>> - Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
>>
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 5 ++---
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> index b653a21a909e..3570f3b269a9 100644
>> --- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> @@ -42,7 +42,6 @@
>> #define RD_MCA_CMD 0x86
>>
>> /* CPUID MCAMSR mask & index */
>> -#define CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK GENMASK(15, 0)
>> #define CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX 32
>> #define CPUID_MCA_FUNC_MASK GENMASK(31, 0)
>> #define CPUID_EXT_FUNC_INDEX 56
>> @@ -129,7 +128,7 @@ static int rmi_cpuid_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
>> goto exit_unlock;
>> }
>>
>> - thread = msg->cpu_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
>> + thread = msg->cpu_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
> So this takes a u64 and just moves it over 32 bits and then does what?
> I guess it makes sense but how did the original code ever work at all?
CPUID register data(leaf and sub-leaf) is provided to user for the input
thread.
Previously data is return only for thread 0 and not for other threads.
>> /* Thread > 127, Thread128 CS register, 1'b1 needs to be set to 1 */
>> if (thread > 127) {
>> @@ -210,7 +209,7 @@ static int rmi_mca_msr_read(struct sbrmi_data *data,
>> goto exit_unlock;
>> }
>>
>> - thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out << CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX & CPUID_MCA_THRD_MASK;
>> + thread = msg->mcamsr_in_out >> CPUID_MCA_THRD_INDEX;
> Same here, was the original code just wrong?
>
> And if this wrong, should this get a fixes: line?
I will update the commit message to include the commit ID and the line.
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning reported in smatch
2025-07-01 5:49 ` Greg KH
@ 2025-07-01 9:16 ` Gupta, Akshay
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Gupta, Akshay @ 2025-07-01 9:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Greg KH
Cc: linux-kernel, arnd, shyam-sundar.s-k, gautham.shenoy,
mario.limonciello, naveenkrishna.chatradhi, anand.umarji,
Dan Carpenter
On 7/1/2025 11:19 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> Caution: This message originated from an External Source. Use proper caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding.
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 05:40:41AM +0000, Akshay Gupta wrote:
>> Smatch warnings are reported for below commit,
>>
>> Commit bb13a84ed6b7 ("misc: amd-sbi: Add support for CPUID protocol")
>> from Apr 28, 2025 (linux-next), leads to the following Smatch static
>> checker warning:
>>
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:376 apml_rmi_reg_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:394 apml_mailbox_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:411 apml_cpuid_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c:428 apml_mcamsr_xfer() warn: maybe return -EFAULT instead of the bytes remaining?
>>
>> copy_to/from_user() returns number of bytes, not copied.
>> In case data not copied, return "-EFAULT".
>> Additionally, fixes the "-EPROTOTYPE" error return as intended.
>>
>> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/aDVyO8ByVsceybk9@stanley.mountain/
>> Reviewed-by: Naveen Krishna Chatradhi <naveenkrishna.chatradhi@amd.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Akshay Gupta <akshay.gupta@amd.com>
>> ---
>> Changes from v2:
>> - Update commit message to add, "fix the -EPROTOTYPE error return".
>>
>> Changes from v1:
>> - Split patch as per Greg's suggestion
>>
>> drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c | 15 +++++++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> index 3570f3b269a9..9048517c088c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/misc/amd-sbi/rmi-core.c
>> @@ -372,7 +372,8 @@ static int apml_rmi_reg_xfer(struct sbrmi_data *data,
>> mutex_unlock(&data->lock);
>>
>> if (msg.rflag && !ret)
>> - return copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg));
>> + if (copy_to_user(arg, &msg, sizeof(struct apml_reg_xfer_msg)))
>> + return -EFAULT;
>> return ret;
> What commit id does this change fix?
I will update the commit message to address this, thank you
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-07-01 9:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-07-01 5:40 [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue reported in smatch Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:40 ` [PATCH v3 2/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address copy_to/from_user() warning " Akshay Gupta
2025-07-01 5:49 ` Greg KH
2025-07-01 9:16 ` Gupta, Akshay
2025-07-01 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/2] misc: amd-sbi: Address potential integer overflow issue " Greg KH
2025-07-01 9:15 ` Gupta, Akshay
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).