On Thu, 2012-06-28 at 09:44 +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> In vfio_pci_ioctl() there is a potential integer underflow where we
> might allocate less data than intended. We check that hdr.count is not
> too large, but we don't check whether it is negative:
>
> drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci.c
> 312 if (hdr.argsz - minsz < hdr.count * size ||
> 313 hdr.count > vfio_pci_get_irq_count(vdev, hdr.index))
> 314 return -EINVAL;
> 315
> 316 data = kmalloc(hdr.count * size, GFP_KERNEL);
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/vfio.h b/include/linux/vfio.h
> index 300d49b..86ef2da 100644
> --- a/include/linux/vfio.h
> +++ b/include/linux/vfio.h
> @@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ struct vfio_irq_set {
> #define VFIO_IRQ_SET_ACTION_TRIGGER (1 << 5) /* Trigger interrupt */
> __u32 index;
> __s32 start;
> - __s32 count;
> + __u32 count;
> __u8 data[];
> };
> #define VFIO_DEVICE_SET_IRQS _IO(VFIO_TYPE, VFIO_BASE + 10)
Good find. I've actually trickled this through to change a number of
the function params to unsigned from int. Also in this struct, start
should be unsigned. Thanks for the report!
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
