Re: [PATCH next] nvdimm: Prevent integer overflow in ramdax_get_config_data()

Ira Weiny
2025-11-25T16:36:00Z

Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The "cmd->in_offset" variable comes from the user via the __nd_ioctl()
> function. The problem is that the "cmd->in_offset + cmd->in_length"
> addition could have an integer wrapping issue if cmd->in_offset is close
> to UINT_MAX . The "cmd->in_length" variable has been capped, but the
> "cmd->in_offset" variable has not. Both of these variables are type u32.

Does ramdax_set_config_data() also need this? I'm not quite following
where in_length is capped so I'm inclined to add size_add in both set and
get.

Ira

>
> Fixes: 43bc0aa19a21 ("nvdimm: allow exposing RAM carveouts as NVDIMM DIMM devices")
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
> ---
> drivers/nvdimm/ramdax.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/nvdimm/ramdax.c b/drivers/nvdimm/ramdax.c
> index 63cf05791829..faa6f3101972 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvdimm/ramdax.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvdimm/ramdax.c
> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ramdax_get_config_data(struct nvdimm *nvdimm, int buf_len,
> return -EINVAL;
> if (struct_size(cmd, out_buf, cmd->in_length) > buf_len)
> return -EINVAL;
> - if (cmd->in_offset + cmd->in_length > LABEL_AREA_SIZE)
> + if (size_add(cmd->in_offset, cmd->in_length) > LABEL_AREA_SIZE)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> memcpy(cmd->out_buf, dimm->label_area + cmd->in_offset, cmd->in_length);
> --
> 2.51.0
>