From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon) Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2016 15:30:28 +0000 Subject: linux-4.4-rc8/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c:78: 32/64 bit problem ? In-Reply-To: <20160104152841.GG1616@arm.com> References: <20160104141657.GC1616@arm.com> <20160104152841.GG1616@arm.com> Message-ID: <20160104153027.GH1616@arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 03:28:41PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Mon, Jan 04, 2016 at 04:24:49PM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > index f4bc779e62e8..fd1f4e678655 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/module.c > > @@ -75,14 +75,17 @@ static u64 do_reloc(enum aarch64_reloc_op > > reloc_op, void *place, u64 val) > > > > static int reloc_data(enum aarch64_reloc_op op, void *place, u64 val, int len) > > { > > - u64 imm_mask = (1 << len) - 1; > > s64 sval = do_reloc(op, place, val); > > > > switch (len) { > > case 16: > > + if (sval < S16_MIN || sval > U16_MAX) > > + return -ERANGE; > > *(s16 *)place = sval; > > Doesn't this break ABS relocs, which are allowed to overflow? Gah, that only applies to the 64-bit relocs. Sorry for the noise. Will