Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: testing array offset 'port->logbuffer_head' before use

[Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>]

On 3/24/22 21:34, Haowen Bai wrote:
> Fix possible indexing array of bound for
> port->logbuffer[port->logbuffer_head], where port->logbuffer_head boundary
>   check happens later. so we do it before.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Haowen Bai <baihaowen@meizu.com>
> ---
>   drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 15 ++++++++-------
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> index 5fce795..541e9e4 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
> @@ -591,6 +591,14 @@ static void _tcpm_log(struct tcpm_port *port, const char *fmt, va_list args)
>   	unsigned long rem_nsec;
>   
>   	mutex_lock(&port->logbuffer_lock);
> +
> +	if (port->logbuffer_head < 0 ||
> +	    port->logbuffer_head >= LOG_BUFFER_ENTRIES) {
> +		dev_warn(port->dev,
> +			 "Bad log buffer index %d\n", port->logbuffer_head);
> +		goto abort;
> +	}
> +
>   	if (!port->logbuffer[port->logbuffer_head]) {
>   		port->logbuffer[port->logbuffer_head] =
>   				kzalloc(LOG_BUFFER_ENTRY_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -607,13 +615,6 @@ static void _tcpm_log(struct tcpm_port *port, const char *fmt, va_list args)
>   		strcpy(tmpbuffer, "overflow");
>   	}
>   
> -	if (port->logbuffer_head < 0 ||
> -	    port->logbuffer_head >= LOG_BUFFER_ENTRIES) {
> -		dev_warn(port->dev,
> -			 "Bad log buffer index %d\n", port->logbuffer_head);
> -		goto abort;
> -	}
> -
>   	if (!port->logbuffer[port->logbuffer_head]) {
>   		dev_warn(port->dev,
>   			 "Log buffer index %d is NULL\n", port->logbuffer_head);

One could argue that the check is unnecessary and can be removed as it can be proven
that it logbuffer_head always in the range of [0, LOG_BUFFER_ENTRIES - 1]. Moving
the check, however, does not add any value unless you can _prove_ that it needs to
be moved, ie that logbuffer_head can be observed to be < 0 or >= LOG_BUFFER_ENTRIES.
I think that is quite unlikely.

Guenter