Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
From:   Yaohui Wang <yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
To:     dave.hansen@linux.intel.com
Cc:     luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Luo <luoben@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Yahui Wang <yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 2/2] mm: fix boundary judgment issues in kernel/resource.c
Date:   Fri, 11 Jun 2021 12:21:47 +0800
Message-Id: <20210611042147.80744-3-yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
In-Reply-To: <20210611042147.80744-1-yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
References: <20210611042147.80744-1-yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk

The original boundary judgment may ignore @end if @end equals @start. For
example, if we call ioremap(phys, 1), then @end == @start, and the memory
check will not be applied on the page where @end lives, which is
unexpected.

In kernel/resource.c:find_next_iomem_res, the mem region is a closed
interval (i.e. [@start..@end]). So @start == @end should be allowed.

In kernel/resource.c:__walk_iomem_res_desc, the mem region is a closed
interval (i.e. [@start..@end]). So @start == @end should be allowed.

Signed-off-by: Ben Luo <luoben@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Yahui Wang <yaohuiwang@linux.alibaba.com>
---
 kernel/resource.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/resource.c b/kernel/resource.c
index 16e0c7e8e..b29c8c720 100644
--- a/kernel/resource.c
+++ b/kernel/resource.c
@@ -353,7 +353,7 @@ static int find_next_iomem_res(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t end,
 	if (!res)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	if (start >= end)
+	if (start > end)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	read_lock(&resource_lock);
@@ -408,7 +408,7 @@ static int __walk_iomem_res_desc(resource_size_t start, resource_size_t end,
 	struct resource res;
 	int ret = -EINVAL;
 
-	while (start < end &&
+	while (start <= end &&
 	       !find_next_iomem_res(start, end, flags, desc, first_lvl, &res)) {
 		ret = (*func)(&res, arg);
 		if (ret)
-- 
2.25.1