[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v1 03/10] xen/pt: Check if reg->init function sets the 'data' past the reg->size
On Thu, 2 Jul 2015, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote: > It should never happen, but in case it does (an developer adds > a new register and the 'init_val' expands past the register > size) we want to report. The code will only write up to > reg->size so there is no runtime danger of the register spilling > across other ones - however to catch this sort of thing > we still return an error. > > Signed-off-by: Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > hw/xen/xen_pt_config_init.c | 10 ++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/hw/xen/xen_pt_config_init.c b/hw/xen/xen_pt_config_init.c > index 3938afd..09309ba 100644 > --- a/hw/xen/xen_pt_config_init.c > +++ b/hw/xen/xen_pt_config_init.c > @@ -1904,9 +1904,15 @@ static int > xen_pt_config_reg_init(XenPCIPassthroughState *s, > } else > val = data; > > + if (val & ~size_mask) { > + XEN_PT_ERR(&s->dev,"Offset 0x%04x:0x%04x expands past register > size(%d)!\n", > + offset, val, reg->size); > + g_free(reg_entry); > + return -ENXIO; > + } If we worry about changes to init_val, wouldn't it be better to add QEMU_BUILD_BUG_ON(data & ~size_mask)? > /* This could be just pci_set_long as we don't modify the bits > - * past reg->size, but in case this routine is run in parallel > - * we do not want to over-write other registers. */ > + * past reg->size, but in case this routine is run in parallel or the > + * init value is larger, we do not want to over-write registers. */ > switch (reg->size) { > case 1: pci_set_byte(s->dev.config + offset, (uint8_t)val); break; > case 2: pci_set_word(s->dev.config + offset, (uint16_t)val); break; > -- > 2.1.0 > _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |