lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Apr]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] drm/i915: fix integer overflow in i915_gem_execbuffer2()
Date
On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 10:01:36 -0400, Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Apr 6, 2012, at 9:54 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 09:46:46 -0400, Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Apr 6, 2012, at 9:36 AM, Chris Wilson wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Fri, 6 Apr 2012 08:58:18 -0400, Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> A large args->buffer_count from userspace may overflow the allocation
> >>>> size, leading to out-of-bounds access.
> >>>>
> >>>> Use kmalloc_array() to avoid that.
> >>>
> >>> I can safely say that exec list larger than 4GiB is going to be an
> >>> illegal operation and would rather the ioctl failed outright with
> >>> EINVAL.
> >>
> >> On 32-bit platform?
> >
> > On any platform. The largest it can legally be is a few tens of megabytes.
>
> IDGI. First we come to i915_gem_execbuffer2() from ioctl:
>
> exec2_list = kmalloc(sizeof(*exec2_list)*args->buffer_count, ...);
>
> args->buffer_count is passed from userspace so it can be any value.

That I agreed with, I just disagree with how you chose to handle it.
Rather than continue on and attempt to vmalloc a large array we should
just fail the ioctl with EINVAL.
-Chris

--
Chris Wilson, Intel Open Source Technology Centre


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-04-06 16:47    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans