From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Cc: James Smart <james.smart@broadcom.com>,
Ram Vegesna <ram.vegesna@broadcom.com>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"Martin K. Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi: elx: libefc: Fix second parameter type in state callbacks
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2022 12:08:30 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202211021208.055D396D8E@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221102161906.2781508-1-nathan@kernel.org>
On Wed, Nov 02, 2022 at 09:19:06AM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> With clang's kernel control flow integrity (kCFI, CONFIG_CFI_CLANG),
> indirect call targets are validated against the expected function
> pointer prototype to make sure the call target is valid to help mitigate
> ROP attacks. If they are not identical, there is a failure at run time,
> which manifests as either a kernel panic or thread getting killed. A
> proposed warning in clang aims to catch these at compile time, which
> reveals:
>
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efc_node.c:811:22: error: incompatible function pointer types assigning to 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, u32, void *)' (aka 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, unsigned int, void *)') from 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, enum efc_sm_event, void *)' [-Werror,-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types-strict]
> ctx->current_state = state;
> ^ ~~~~~
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efc_node.c:878:21: error: incompatible function pointer types assigning to 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, u32, void *)' (aka 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, unsigned int, void *)') from 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, enum efc_sm_event, void *)' [-Werror,-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types-strict]
> node->nodedb_state = state;
> ^ ~~~~~
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efc_node.c:905:6: error: incompatible function pointer types assigning to 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, enum efc_sm_event, void *)' from 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, u32, void *)' (aka 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, unsigned int, void *)') [-Werror,-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types-strict]
> pf = node->nodedb_state;
> ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efc_device.c:455:22: error: incompatible function pointer types assigning to 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, u32, void *)' (aka 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, unsigned int, void *)') from 'void (struct efc_sm_ctx *, enum efc_sm_event, void *)' [-Werror,-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types-strict]
> node->nodedb_state = __efc_d_init;
> ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efc_sm.c:41:22: error: incompatible function pointer types assigning to 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, u32, void *)' (aka 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, unsigned int, void *)') from 'void (*)(struct efc_sm_ctx *, enum efc_sm_event, void *)' [-Werror,-Wincompatible-function-pointer-types-strict]
> ctx->current_state = state;
> ^ ~~~~~
>
> The type of the second parameter in the prototypes of ->current_state()
> and ->nodedb_state() ('u32') does not match the implementations, which
> have a second parameter type of 'enum efc_sm_event'. Update the
> prototypes to have the correct second parameter type, clearing up all
> the warnings and CFI failures.
>
> Link: https://github.com/ClangBuiltLinux/linux/issues/1750
> Reported-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-02 19:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-02 16:19 [PATCH] scsi: elx: libefc: Fix second parameter type in state callbacks Nathan Chancellor
2022-11-02 19:08 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2022-11-03 11:32 ` Ram Kishore Vegesna
2022-11-08 3:05 ` Martin K. Petersen
2022-11-17 18:29 ` Martin K. Petersen
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=202211021208.055D396D8E@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=james.smart@broadcom.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=ram.vegesna@broadcom.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=target-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trix@redhat.com \
/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