From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@google.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
james.smart@broadcom.com, ram.vegesna@broadcom.com,
jejb@linux.ibm.com, ndesaulniers@google.com,
linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, target-devel@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.1 06/16] scsi: elx: libefc: Fix second parameter type in state callbacks
Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 20:20:43 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221220012053.1222101-6-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220012053.1222101-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 3d75e766b58a7410d4e835c534e1b4664a8f62d0 ]
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>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221102161906.2781508-1-nathan@kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Martin K. Petersen <martin.petersen@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efclib.h | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efclib.h b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efclib.h
index dde20891c2dd..57e338612812 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efclib.h
+++ b/drivers/scsi/elx/libefc/efclib.h
@@ -58,10 +58,12 @@ enum efc_node_send_ls_acc {
#define EFC_LINK_STATUS_UP 0
#define EFC_LINK_STATUS_DOWN 1
+enum efc_sm_event;
+
/* State machine context header */
struct efc_sm_ctx {
void (*current_state)(struct efc_sm_ctx *ctx,
- u32 evt, void *arg);
+ enum efc_sm_event evt, void *arg);
const char *description;
void *app;
@@ -365,7 +367,7 @@ struct efc_node {
int prev_evt;
void (*nodedb_state)(struct efc_sm_ctx *ctx,
- u32 evt, void *arg);
+ enum efc_sm_event evt, void *arg);
struct timer_list gidpt_delay_timer;
u64 time_last_gidpt_msec;
--
2.35.1
next parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-20 1:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20221220012053.1222101-1-sashal@kernel.org>
2022-12-20 1:20 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2022-12-20 1:20 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.1 10/16] drm/fsl-dcu: Fix return type of fsl_dcu_drm_connector_mode_valid() Sasha Levin
2022-12-20 1:20 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.1 11/16] drm/sti: Fix return type of sti_{dvo,hda,hdmi}_connector_mode_valid() Sasha Levin
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=20221220012053.1222101-6-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=james.smart@broadcom.com \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--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=ram.vegesna@broadcom.com \
--cc=samitolvanen@google.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=target-devel@vger.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