Re: [PATCH] powerpc/ipic: Fix a bounds check in ipic_set_priority()

[Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>]

On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Michael Ellerman wrote:

> Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr> writes:
> > On Wed, 5 Dec 2018, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Dan,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the patch.
> >>
> >> Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com> writes:
> >> > The ipic_info[] array only has 95 elements so I have made the bounds
> >> > check smaller to prevent a read overflow.  It was Smatch that found
> >> > this issue:
> >> >
> >> >     arch/powerpc/sysdev/ipic.c:784 ipic_set_priority()
> >> >     error: buffer overflow 'ipic_info' 95 <= 127
> >> >
> >> > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
> >> > ---
> >> > I wasn't able to find any callers of this code.  Maybe we removed the
> >> > last one in commit b9f0f1bb2bca ("[POWERPC] Adapt ipic driver to new
> >> > host_ops interface, add set_irq_type to set IRQ sense").  So perhaps we
> >> > should just remove it.  I'm not really comfortable doing that myself,
> >> > because I don't know the code well enough and can't build test
> >> > it properly.
> >>
> >> Hah wow, last usage removed in 2006!
> >>
> >> I don't see any mention of it since then, so I'll remove it. If it
> >> breaks something we can put it back.
> >>
> >> Can smatch help us find things like this that are defined non-static but
> >> never used?
> >
> > I wrote a Coccinelle script for this, that just uses grep.  Of course the
> > results need checking because uses can be constructed within macros using
> > #.
>
> That would be cool. I can't immediately see it in scripts/coccinelle, is
> it somewhere else?

No, it needs improvement...  I'll try to do something with it soon.  I
don't think it  is well suited to scrips/coccinelle, because it needs to
know where the kernel tree is to do the grep.

julia

>
> > Are things that are defined static but are never used useful to keep
> > around?
>
> No, but the compiler will usually tell us about them via -Wunused-function.
>
> cheers
>