Hi,
On Tue, 2021-08-03 at 21:11 +0300, Evgeny Novikov wrote:
> It looks like pmc_core_get_low_power_modes() mixes up modes and
> priorities. In addition to invalid behavior, potentially this can
> cause buffer overflows since the driver reads priorities from the
> register and then it uses them as indexes for array lpm_priority
> that can contain 8 elements at most. The patch swaps modes and
> priorities.
>
> Found by Linux Driver Verification project (linuxtesting.org).
>
> Fixes: 005125bfd70e ("platform/x86: intel_pmc_core: Handle sub-states
> generically")
> Signed-off-by: Evgeny Novikov <novikov@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_core.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_core.c
> b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_core.c
> index b0e486a6bdfb..667b3df03764 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel_pmc_core.c
> @@ -1469,8 +1469,8 @@ static void pmc_core_get_low_power_modes(struct
> pmc_dev *pmcdev)
> int pri0 = GENMASK(3, 0) & priority;
> int pri1 = (GENMASK(7, 4) & priority) >> 4;
>
> - lpm_priority[pri0] = mode;
> - lpm_priority[pri1] = mode + 1;
Agree with the buffer overflow concern if hardware were to return an
incorrect value. But the assignment and indexing are correct. The list
was made to get the modes in priority order which is the order of
states the hardware will attempt to use if able.
I'll submit a patch for the overflow.
David
> + lpm_priority[mode] = pri0;
> + lpm_priority[mode + 1] = pri1;
> }
>
> /*
