Re: [PATCH 3/5] add_orom(): Compare content of struct imsm_orom rather than pointers to it

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Artur Paszkiewicz <artur.paszkiewicz@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 02/24/2015 10:00 PM, Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
>> From: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> 
>> This avoids adding the same orom entry to the oroms list multiple
>> times, as the comparison of pointers is never going to succeed, in
>> particular when '*orom' points to a local stack variable in the
>> calling function.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  platform-intel.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/platform-intel.c b/platform-intel.c
>> index 37274da..a4ffa9f 100644
>> --- a/platform-intel.c
>> +++ b/platform-intel.c
>> @@ -255,8 +255,8 @@ static const struct imsm_orom *add_orom(const struct imsm_orom *orom)
>>  	int i;
>>  
>>  	for (i = 0; i < SYS_DEV_MAX; i++) {
>> -		if (&oroms[i].orom == orom)
>> -			return orom;
>> +		if (!memcmp(&oroms[i].orom, orom, sizeof(struct imsm_orom)))
>> +			return &oroms[i].orom;
>>  		if (oroms[i].orom.signature[0] == 0) {
>>  			oroms[i].orom = *orom;
>>  			return &oroms[i].orom;
>> 
>
> Hi Jes,
>
> You are right that this can add the same entry multiple times, but this
> is how it is supposed to work. The oroms list should contain all the
> platform's oroms and they can be the same, this is why memcmp() should
> not be used here. We don't want to compare the contents of the
> structure, just its address. Sorry if it's not clear.

Artur,

Then the code is fundamentally broken, since you end up comparing a
stack variable against the oroms array when you call it from
find_imsm_efi(). Worse you can end up returning the local stack variable
declared in find_imsm_efi() to the calling function - there is no way
that can be correct.

Look at this:

static const struct imsm_orom *add_orom(const struct imsm_orom *orom)
{
        int i;

        for (i = 0; i < SYS_DEV_MAX; i++) {
                if (&oroms[i].orom == orom)
                        return orom;
                if (oroms[i].orom.signature[0] == 0) {
                        oroms[i].orom = *orom;
                        return &oroms[i].orom;
                }
        }
        return NULL;
}

const struct imsm_orom *find_imsm_efi(struct sys_dev *hba)
{
        struct imsm_orom orom;
        const struct imsm_orom *ret;
        int err;

....

        ret = add_orom(&orom);
        add_orom_device_id(ret, hba->dev_id);

        return ret;
}

Cheers,
Jes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-raid" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux RAID Wiki]     [ATA RAID]     [Linux SCSI Target Infrastructure]     [Linux Block]     [Linux IDE]     [Linux SCSI]     [Linux Hams]     [Device Mapper]     [Device Mapper Cryptographics]     [Kernel]     [Linux Admin]     [Linux Net]     [GFS]     [RPM]     [git]     [Yosemite Forum]


  Powered by Linux