Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 6:16 AM Jeff Moyer <jmo...@redhat.com> wrote:
>>
>> Dan Williams <dan.j.willi...@intel.com> writes:
>>
>> > Changes since v1 [1]:
>> > * Include another patch make sure that function-number zero can be
>> > safely used as an invalid function number (Jeff)
>> > * Add a comment clarifying why zero is an invalid function number (Jeff)
>> > * Pass nfit_mem to cmd_to_func() (Jeff)
>> > * Collect a Tested-by from Sujith
>> > [1]: https://lists.01.org/pipermail/linux-nvdimm/2019-January/019435.html
>>
>> For the series:
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Jeff Moyer <jmo...@redhat.com>
>>
>> Thanks, Dan!
>
> Thanks, although I just realized one more change. The ND_CMD_CALL case
> should zero out command after the function translation, otherwise
> userspace can call functions that the kernel is blocking in the
> dsm_mask.
>
> Holler if this invalidates your "Reviewed-by".
AAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!
:)
> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
> index 87e02f281e51..d7747aceb7ab 100644
> --- a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
> +++ b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
> @@ -463,6 +463,12 @@ int acpi_nfit_ctl(struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor
> *nd_desc, struct nvdimm *nvdimm,
> func = cmd_to_func(nfit_mem, cmd, buf);
> if (func < 0)
> return func;
> + /*
> + * In the ND_CMD_CALL case we're now dependent on 'func'
> + * being validated by the dimm's dsm_mask
> + */
> + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL)
> + cmd = 0;
> dimm_name = nvdimm_name(nvdimm);
> cmd_name = nvdimm_cmd_name(cmd);
> cmd_mask = nvdimm_cmd_mask(nvdimm);
dsm_mask = nfit_mem->dsm_mask;
desc = nd_cmd_dimm_desc(cmd);
That sure doesn't look right. Now cmd_name and desc will be wrong.
> @@ -477,8 +483,10 @@ int acpi_nfit_ctl(struct nvdimm_bus_descriptor
> *nd_desc, struct nvdimm *nvdimm,
> cmd_name = nvdimm_bus_cmd_name(cmd);
> cmd_mask = nd_desc->cmd_mask;
> dsm_mask = cmd_mask;
> - if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL)
> + if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL) {
> dsm_mask = nd_desc->bus_dsm_mask;
> + cmd = 0;
> + }
> desc = nd_cmd_bus_desc(cmd);
And again here.
We could reorder the zeroing, or you could modify the check for a valid
comand/function. Something like this?
/*
* Check for a valid command. For ND_CMD_CALL, we also
* have to make sure that the DSM function is supported.
*/
if (cmd == ND_CMD_CALL && !test_bit(func, &dsm_mask))
return -ENOTTY;
else if (!test_bit(cmd, &cmd_mask))
return -ENOTTY;
Which way do you think is cleaner?
Cheers,
Jeff
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvdimm mailing list
Linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org
https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvdimm
