Re: [PATCH 4/6][RESEND] Emulex FC HBA driver: fix overflow of statically allocated array

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Ok.... here's what happened,

- We changed the define so that it matched what we are using. We never configure
  more than 4 HBQ, thus the index will never be beyond 0-3. The if-check is actually
  innoculous. Given that the change wasn't your patch, we didn't include you as
  the author.

- Coding-wise, you are right, we still didn't fix the range check.

Since this really is just something to keep the tools happy - I'll recind the NACK.
I'll worry about simply removing this if-check later...

James/Andrew, accept this patch - ACK.

-- james s

Jesper Juhl wrote:
On 13/08/07, James Smart <[email protected]> wrote:
NACK

The fix is contained in our 8.2.2 sources recently posted and pushed by James
as part of his last scsi fixes.


I actually did look for it, but couldn't find any lpfc commits with me
listed as author, so I assumed it had not been merged.
I just looked again, at the source this time, up-to-date mainline git
tree, and I still see

        hbqno = tag >> 16;
        if (hbqno > LPFC_MAX_HBQS)
                return NULL;

in drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c

???


-- james s

Jesper Juhl wrote:
(previously send on 09-Aug-2007 20:47)

Hi,

The Coverity checker noticed that we may overrun a statically allocated
array in drivers/scsi/lpfc/lpfc_sli.c::lpfc_sli_hbqbuf_find().
...

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux