From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] net: dsa: mv88e6xxx: hwtstamp: fix potential negative
 array index read
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 11:49:43 -0600
Message-ID: <bbfc4bb1-0fc3-daaa-1416-d60a370e6802@embeddedor.com>
References: <20180215183139.GA23076@embeddedor.com>
 <20180216154846.7ge6seynwxjkopmp@localhost>
 <20180216155617.ykf77vq45bxejfg3@localhost>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Brandon Streiff <brandon.streiff@ni.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@savoirfairelinux.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@gmail.com>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20180216155617.ykf77vq45bxejfg3@localhost>
Content-Language: en-US
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org



On 02/16/2018 09:56 AM, Richard Cochran wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 07:48:46AM -0800, Richard Cochran wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 12:31:39PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> _port_ is being used as index to array port_hwtstamp before verifying
>>> it is a non-negative number and a valid index at line 209 and 258:
>>>
>>> if (port < 0 || port >= mv88e6xxx_num_ports(chip))
>>>
>>> Fix this by checking _port_ before using it as index to array
>>> port_hwtstamp.
>>
>> NAK.   Port is already known to be valid in the callers.
> 
> And so the real bug is the pointless range checking tests.  I would
> welcome patches to remove those.
> 

I just sent a patch for this.

Thank you both, Andrew and Richard for the feedback.
--
Gustavo