Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756199AbaFSN5X (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:57:23 -0400 Received: from mail-ve0-f181.google.com ([209.85.128.181]:52706 "EHLO mail-ve0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754891AbaFSN5W (ORCPT ); Thu, 19 Jun 2014 09:57:22 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1403154257-14591-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> References: <1403154257-14591-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> From: Rob Herring Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 08:57:00 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] of: Check for phys_addr_t overflows in early_init_dt_add_memory_arch To: Laura Abbott Cc: Grant Likely , Rob Herring , Geert Uytterhoeven , "devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Laura Abbott wrote: > The common early_init_dt_add_memory_arch takes the base and size > of a memory region as u64 types. The function never checks if > the base and size can actually fit in a phys_addr_t which may > be smaller than 64-bits. This may result in incorrect memory > being passed to memblock_add if the memory falls outside the > range of phys_addr_t. Add range checks for the base and size if > phys_addr_t is smaller than u64. > > Reported-by: Geert Uytterhoeven > Signed-off-by: Laura Abbott > --- > Geert, can you drop my other patch and give this a test to see if it fixes > your bootup problem? > > --- > drivers/of/fdt.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c > index c4cddf0..f72132c 100644 > --- a/drivers/of/fdt.c > +++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c > @@ -880,6 +880,21 @@ void __init __weak early_init_dt_add_memory_arch(u64 base, u64 size) > const u64 phys_offset = __pa(PAGE_OFFSET); > base &= PAGE_MASK; > size &= PAGE_MASK; > + > +#ifndef CONFIG_ARCH_PHYS_ADDR_T_64BIT > + if (base > ULONG_MAX) { How about removing the ifdef and doing something like: if ((base >> 32) && (sizeof(phys_addr_t) != sizeof(u64))) > + pr_warning("Ignoring memory block 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > + base, base + size); > + return; > + } > + > + if (base + size > ULONG_MAX) { > + pr_warning("Ignoring memory range 0x%lx - 0x%llx\n", > + ULONG_MAX, base + size); > + size = ULONG_MAX - base; > + } > +#endif > + > if (base + size < phys_offset) { > pr_warning("Ignoring memory block 0x%llx - 0x%llx\n", > base, base + size); > -- > The Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, > hosted by The Linux Foundation > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/