On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:51 PM Amadeusz Sławiński
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> In our tests we get UBSAN warning coming from ACPI parser. This is
> caused by trying to resolve operands when there is none.
>
> [ 0.000000] Linux version 5.15.0-rc3chromeavsrel1.0.184+ (root@...) (gcc (Ubuntu 10.3.0-1ubuntu1~20.04) 10.3.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.34) #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 16 00:08:27 UTC 2021
> ...
> [ 14.719508] ================================================================================
> [ 14.719551] UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in /.../linux/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c:401:12
> [ 14.719594] index -1 is out of range for type 'acpi_operand_object *[9]'
> [ 14.719621] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0-rc3chromeavsrel1.0.184+ #1
> [ 14.719657] Hardware name: Intel Corp. Geminilake/GLK RVP2 LP4SD (07), BIOS GELKRVPA.X64.0214.B50.2009111159 09/11/2020
> [ 14.719694] Call Trace:
> [ 14.719712] dump_stack_lvl+0x38/0x49
> [ 14.719749] dump_stack+0x10/0x12
> [ 14.719775] ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x45
> [ 14.719801] __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds.cold+0x44/0x49
> [ 14.719835] acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x1d7/0x6b5
> [ 14.719870] acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x942/0xb34
> ...
>
> Problem happens because WalkState->NumOperands is 0 and it is used when
> trying to access into operands table. Actual code is:
> WalkState->Operands [WalkState->NumOperands -1]
> which causes out of bound access. Improve the check before above access
> to check if ACPI opcode should have any arguments (operands) at all.
>
> Link: https://github.com/acpica/acpica/pull/745
> Signed-off-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <[email protected]>
> Reviewed-by: Cezary Rojewski <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
> index e8ad41387f84..489c9b9d8d15 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
> @@ -389,9 +389,11 @@ acpi_status acpi_ds_exec_end_op(struct acpi_walk_state *walk_state)
>
> /*
> * All opcodes require operand resolution, with the only exceptions
> - * being the object_type and size_of operators.
> + * being the object_type and size_of operators as well as operands that
Should this be "opcodes that take no arguments" rather?
> + * take no arguments.
> */
> - if (!(walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_NO_OPERAND_RESOLVE)) {
> + if (!(walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_NO_OPERAND_RESOLVE) &&
> + (walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_HAS_ARGS)) {
>
> /* Resolve all operands */
>
> --
On 12/8/2022 12:55 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 8, 2022 at 12:51 PM Amadeusz Sławiński
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> In our tests we get UBSAN warning coming from ACPI parser. This is
>> caused by trying to resolve operands when there is none.
>>
>> [ 0.000000] Linux version 5.15.0-rc3chromeavsrel1.0.184+ (root@...) (gcc (Ubuntu 10.3.0-1ubuntu1~20.04) 10.3.0, GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Ubuntu) 2.34) #1 SMP PREEMPT Sat Oct 16 00:08:27 UTC 2021
>> ...
>> [ 14.719508] ================================================================================
>> [ 14.719551] UBSAN: array-index-out-of-bounds in /.../linux/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c:401:12
>> [ 14.719594] index -1 is out of range for type 'acpi_operand_object *[9]'
>> [ 14.719621] CPU: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.15.0-rc3chromeavsrel1.0.184+ #1
>> [ 14.719657] Hardware name: Intel Corp. Geminilake/GLK RVP2 LP4SD (07), BIOS GELKRVPA.X64.0214.B50.2009111159 09/11/2020
>> [ 14.719694] Call Trace:
>> [ 14.719712] dump_stack_lvl+0x38/0x49
>> [ 14.719749] dump_stack+0x10/0x12
>> [ 14.719775] ubsan_epilogue+0x9/0x45
>> [ 14.719801] __ubsan_handle_out_of_bounds.cold+0x44/0x49
>> [ 14.719835] acpi_ds_exec_end_op+0x1d7/0x6b5
>> [ 14.719870] acpi_ps_parse_loop+0x942/0xb34
>> ...
>>
>> Problem happens because WalkState->NumOperands is 0 and it is used when
>> trying to access into operands table. Actual code is:
>> WalkState->Operands [WalkState->NumOperands -1]
>> which causes out of bound access. Improve the check before above access
>> to check if ACPI opcode should have any arguments (operands) at all.
>>
>> Link: https://github.com/acpica/acpica/pull/745
>> Signed-off-by: Amadeusz Sławiński <[email protected]>
>> Reviewed-by: Cezary Rojewski <[email protected]>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c | 6 ++++--
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
>> index e8ad41387f84..489c9b9d8d15 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpica/dswexec.c
>> @@ -389,9 +389,11 @@ acpi_status acpi_ds_exec_end_op(struct acpi_walk_state *walk_state)
>>
>> /*
>> * All opcodes require operand resolution, with the only exceptions
>> - * being the object_type and size_of operators.
>> + * being the object_type and size_of operators as well as operands that
>
> Should this be "opcodes that take no arguments" rather?
>
Yes, it makes more sense that way. I've send v2 and updated pull request
to acpica.
>> + * take no arguments.
>> */
>> - if (!(walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_NO_OPERAND_RESOLVE)) {
>> + if (!(walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_NO_OPERAND_RESOLVE) &&
>> + (walk_state->op_info->flags & AML_HAS_ARGS)) {
>>
>> /* Resolve all operands */
>>
>> --