What happened to this one?
regards,
dan carpenter
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 02:42:20PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> The story is that Smatch marks skb->data as untrusted and so it
> complains about this code:
>
> drivers/scsi/cxgbi/cxgb4i/cxgb4i.c:2111 t4_uld_rx_handler()
> error: buffer overflow 'cxgb4i_cplhandlers' 239 <= 255.
>
> I don't know the code very well, but it looks like a reasonable warning
> message. Let's address it by adding a sanity check to make sure "opc"
> is within bounds.
>
> Fixes: bbc02c7e9d34 ("cxgb4: Add register, message, and FW definitions")
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> diff --git a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/cxgb4i/cxgb4i.c b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/cxgb4i/cxgb4i.c
> index 266eddf17a99..94b2d5660a07 100644
> --- a/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/cxgb4i/cxgb4i.c
> +++ b/drivers/scsi/cxgbi/cxgb4i/cxgb4i.c
> @@ -2108,12 +2108,12 @@ static int t4_uld_rx_handler(void *handle, const __be64 *rsp,
> log_debug(1 << CXGBI_DBG_TOE,
> "cdev %p, opcode 0x%x(0x%x,0x%x), skb %p.\n",
> cdev, opc, rpl->ot.opcode_tid, ntohl(rpl->ot.opcode_tid), skb);
> - if (cxgb4i_cplhandlers[opc])
> - cxgb4i_cplhandlers[opc](cdev, skb);
> - else {
> + if (opc >= ARRAY_SIZE(cxgb4i_cplhandlers) || !cxgb4i_cplhandlers[opc]) {
> pr_err("No handler for opcode 0x%x.\n", opc);
> __kfree_skb(skb);
> + return 0;
> }
> + cxgb4i_cplhandlers[opc](cdev, skb);
> return 0;
> nomem:
> log_debug(1 << CXGBI_DBG_TOE, "OOM bailing out.\n");
