Mason <slash.tmp@xxxxxxx> writes: > On 06/03/2015 23:35, Måns Rullgård wrote: > >> I can test a patch on some similar hardware if needed. Do note that >> nothing is visibly broken as is, so any patch will only be correcting >> theoretical problems. > > I'm confused. You make it sound as if an out-of-bound access > is not a "real" problem? > > The code boils down to: > > static const u8 in[7], out[5]; > > then, when the argument is UART_SCR, read in[7] or out[7] to > determine where to __raw_readl() or __raw_writel(). > > Are you saying there's no point in fixing that, because there > is no visible brokenness? No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that because there is nothing visibly broken, nothing will be visibly fixed by having it corrected. > Can you confirm that your test runs hit serial8250_suspend_port? Doesn't matter if it does. The bad index will hit some zero-padding following the array and end up trying to write UART_RXD which is read-only. The bad array indexing should of course be fixed, but you will not be able to notice any difference. -- Måns Rullgård mans@xxxxxxxxx -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-serial" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
