On 2/17/2022 3:52 PM, john.c.harri...@intel.com wrote:
From: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
Some G2H handlers were reading the context id field from the payload
before checking the payload met the minimum length required.
Signed-off-by: John Harrison <john.c.harri...@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospu...@intel.com>
While double-checking the other msg handler I noticed that we don't do
any checks on len for intel_guc_log_handle_flush_event(). Not really
relevant for this patch, just wondering out loud if we should add a
check to make sure the message is not corrupted.
Daniele
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c | 6 ++++--
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
index b70b1ff46418..ea17dca68674 100644
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/gt/uc/intel_guc_submission.c
@@ -3895,12 +3895,13 @@ int intel_guc_deregister_done_process_msg(struct
intel_guc *guc,
u32 len)
{
struct intel_context *ce;
- u32 ctx_id = msg[0];
+ u32 ctx_id;
if (unlikely(len < 1)) {
drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm, "Invalid length %u\n", len);
return -EPROTO;
}
+ ctx_id = msg[0];
ce = g2h_context_lookup(guc, ctx_id);
if (unlikely(!ce))
@@ -3946,12 +3947,13 @@ int intel_guc_sched_done_process_msg(struct intel_guc
*guc,
{
struct intel_context *ce;
unsigned long flags;
- u32 ctx_id = msg[0];
+ u32 ctx_id;
if (unlikely(len < 2)) {
drm_err(&guc_to_gt(guc)->i915->drm, "Invalid length %u\n", len);
return -EPROTO;
}
+ ctx_id = msg[0];
ce = g2h_context_lookup(guc, ctx_id);
if (unlikely(!ce))
