On 1/3/24 13:56, Laszlo Ersek wrote:
> (8) Apologies if it was me who suggested ALIGN_VALUE() previously, but
> this is, in effect, an unchecked addition. I can't off-hand see evidence
> that it can never overflow (the previous checks don't seem to prevent an
> overflow here), so I suggest:
>
> //
> // the next variable header starts aligned at 4 bytes
> //
> Status = SafeUintnAdd (VarEnd, (4 - (VarEnd & 4)) & 4, &VarOffset);
> if RETURN_ERROR (Status) {
> DEBUG ((DEBUG_ERROR, "%a: integer overflow\n", __func__));
> return EFI_NOT_FOUND;
> }
Heh, what I wrote is bogus. Man, binary is hard. :) So, let me try again:
Status = SafeUintnAdd (VarEnd, (4 - (VarEnd & 3)) & 3, &VarOffset);
Ideally, we'd have a SafeIntLib set of APIs for aligning up...
Sorry :)
Laszlo
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#113087): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/113087
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/103171811/21656
Group Owner: devel+ow...@edk2.groups.io
Unsubscribe:
https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/leave/9847357/21656/1706620634/xyzzy
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
