Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
From:   Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 5 Apr 2020 19:23:15 +0200
To:     William Kucharski <william.kucharski@oracle.com>
Cc:     Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, jroedel@suse.de,
        vbabka@suse.cz, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/vmalloc: Sanitize __get_vm_area() arguments
Message-ID: <20200405172315.GA8404@pc636>
References: <D25C4027-6EF9-44C2-AD4D-DDC785288B9A@oracle.com>
 <20200404185229.GA424@pc636>
 <EEB53CBF-0B3F-43E0-94F6-B001918BAC3E@oracle.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <EEB53CBF-0B3F-43E0-94F6-B001918BAC3E@oracle.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Apr 04, 2020 at 11:25:45PM -0600, William Kucharski wrote:
> 
> 
> > On Apr 4, 2020, at 12:52 PM, Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> ﻿Is there any need to similarly sanitize “size” to assure start + size doesn’t go past “end?”
> >> 
> > Why is that double check needed if all such tests are done deeper on stack?
> 
> If such tests ARE performed, then it doesn't matter to me whether it is checked before or after,
> it just seems that nothing checks whether start + size makes some sort of sense with respect
> to end.
> 
> I admit I didn't walk through all the routines to see if such a check would be superfluous.
> 
Yes, we check it:

<snip>
static __always_inline bool
is_within_this_va(struct vmap_area *va, unsigned long size,
 unsigned long align, unsigned long vstart)
{
 ...
 return (nva_start_addr + size <= va->va_end);
}
<snip>

--
Vlad Rezki