From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com>,
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@kernel.org>,
Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@arm.com>,
arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Fix OOB in scmi_power_name_get()
Date: Fri, 15 May 2026 12:46:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <agcHnzzdhV36j9eH@pluto> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMuHMdXreO-6xQ+e88AKQ_vSiwMPMnx=t8h5JChBAtuV4UDMEw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 01:29:27PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
Hi all,
> On Fri, 15 May 2026 at 12:28, Dan Carpenter <error27@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 15, 2026 at 11:59:15AM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > scmi_power_name_get() does not validate the domain number passed by the
> > > external caller, which may lead to an out-of-bounds access.
> >
> > Is an external caller an out of tree caller? So far as I can see this
>
> I meant a caller outside drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/.
>
> > is only called by scmi_pm_domain_probe().
> >
> > scmi_pd->name = power_ops->name_get(ph, i);
> >
> > where i < num_domains.
>
> You are right. But this seems to be only API implementation in
> drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/ that does not validate the passed domain
> number.
>
Yes we tend to validate protocol operations calls even if apparently
safe from teh caller perspective...indeed I have this fixed locally
since ages in an horrible patch, that does a lot more, and that I
never posted :P
Usually, if it is worth, we also build an internal domain get helper to
reuse across the protocol unit...but here really there are only 2 call-sites.
What I am not sure is what to return: "unknown" is safer as of now than NULL
for sure, but really, what happened is NOT that the name was "unknown" (which
by itself would be out-of-spec behaviour) it is more that the whole domain that
was referred to that was invalid and NOT existent...
....mmm I suppose we are opening another can of worms here :P
Thanks,
Cristian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-15 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-15 9:59 [PATCH] firmware: arm_scmi: Fix OOB in scmi_power_name_get() Geert Uytterhoeven
2026-05-15 10:28 ` Dan Carpenter
2026-05-15 11:29 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2026-05-15 11:36 ` Dan Carpenter
2026-05-15 11:46 ` Cristian Marussi [this message]
2026-05-15 12:00 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2026-05-15 12:10 ` Cristian Marussi
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=agcHnzzdhV36j9eH@pluto \
--to=cristian.marussi@arm.com \
--cc=arm-scmi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=error27@gmail.com \
--cc=geert@linux-m68k.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sudeep.holla@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox