From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00959C35242 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 19:33:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9785F20873 for ; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 19:33:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="InhpFNCP" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 9785F20873 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48K3T267xdzDqTy for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 06:33:26 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=kernel.org (client-ip=198.145.29.99; helo=mail.kernel.org; envelope-from=sashal@kernel.org; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=kernel.org Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=default header.b=InhpFNCP; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48JzDh3WGnzDqRX for ; Sat, 15 Feb 2020 03:22:28 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from sasha-vm.mshome.net (c-73-47-72-35.hsd1.nh.comcast.net [73.47.72.35]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BACF72474D; Fri, 14 Feb 2020 16:22:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1581697344; bh=UO55tRwkGBNUjjrj++FD29xVqIkGuWGsESnDe4rEb70=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=InhpFNCPOznifp4nrgSwOUceFRsCPWcCVAFkykuAmTKOb+MpIZFOUwgr7i5tUnxwf SZ75ZPTys09SYH1J1IGNKZrmP6vJ46cexUr77yktQUlNlsNNUROC2HGvDZKkz2TH17 kQye9uyyphoHy+L9R+ntAdOto19SjS/rLf3igiBg= From: Sasha Levin To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 4.9 049/141] net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc: reject muram offsets above 64K Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 11:19:49 -0500 Message-Id: <20200214162122.19794-49-sashal@kernel.org> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 In-Reply-To: <20200214162122.19794-1-sashal@kernel.org> References: <20200214162122.19794-1-sashal@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-stable: review X-Patchwork-Hint: Ignore Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Sasha Levin , Timur Tabi , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Rasmus Villemoes , Li Yang , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, "David S . Miller" , Qiang Zhao Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" From: Rasmus Villemoes [ Upstream commit 148587a59f6b85831695e0497d9dd1af5f0495af ] Qiang Zhao points out that these offsets get written to 16-bit registers, and there are some QE platforms with more than 64K muram. So it is possible that qe_muram_alloc() gives us an allocation that can't actually be used by the hardware, so detect and reject that. Reported-by: Qiang Zhao Reviewed-by: Timur Tabi Signed-off-by: Rasmus Villemoes Acked-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Li Yang Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin --- drivers/net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc.c | 5 +++++ 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) diff --git a/drivers/net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc.c b/drivers/net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc.c index af85a1b3135e2..87bf05a81db50 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc.c +++ b/drivers/net/wan/fsl_ucc_hdlc.c @@ -209,6 +209,11 @@ static int uhdlc_init(struct ucc_hdlc_private *priv) ret = -ENOMEM; goto free_riptr; } + if (riptr != (u16)riptr || tiptr != (u16)tiptr) { + dev_err(priv->dev, "MURAM allocation out of addressable range\n"); + ret = -ENOMEM; + goto free_tiptr; + } /* Set RIPTR, TIPTR */ iowrite16be(riptr, &priv->ucc_pram->riptr); -- 2.20.1