From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 506C9C0015E for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 14:22:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231387AbjG0OWt (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2023 10:22:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:55742 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231837AbjG0OWr (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Jul 2023 10:22:47 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x434.google.com (mail-wr1-x434.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::434]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24BC8122 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:22:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wr1-x434.google.com with SMTP id ffacd0b85a97d-3172144c084so1107153f8f.1 for ; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:22:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20221208; t=1690467764; x=1691072564; h=content-transfer-encoding:subject:from:cc:to:content-language :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=HaT2pEF0J9eN1S1CydWmLfdCMmVfOoCmMoN2wkr7y8k=; b=FIMiQR8bJiPm9V7gKRr2Rij4FvQEQgQs6OvDqK7Q0bWtMW7GtWSZj7wO8u4t1vW3gn QfDDMRt0Tu5CdUkK8g2AIOm7U/lgYIEN5/t0xN6cKbKHR4Qus8tR38m5dACZTsG2MoYF nSh0+Tzl/m4EERjBFmUdVcfgOfJwshOX99zmxyr9jwJks70Sk51Mczc65Ipvzb2jvICe w0J9GMGm9OGcZwqt4R03QQ8+RezeqzRrOrT15K5lk0UKQu58etypRJzWlFTToiU8qEpO Z3E+n/M75MrDzu8D/UxEFUjNh42ZD/qUlcoiNv4sbBl4K0mHhOGdGJNxCCJ9a8Ar1v7v oFaQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20221208; t=1690467764; x=1691072564; h=content-transfer-encoding:subject:from:cc:to:content-language :user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HaT2pEF0J9eN1S1CydWmLfdCMmVfOoCmMoN2wkr7y8k=; b=HsmjJheLYaBv4t9zQPoDmDYMUGMrevbPSQ+snhrZ+Ih87I90mY3P8pR8Y77ve8Xb/w V/yHMXqXpUGt5xrWYE811fdticPC7NyWyU/HsgZ1RYG1IJyGeqn8YkwqX78xoBxi1qmF FXdkoUTMiikbAhfi1bAjIba8Vzl4Hj0jjdOE5z2aLPI1qPRob7uo+E1yh9yojYk1j+Gf /ol8s8pEa82FGjO7nt+NH67flKuURIJOmtOwW4Z95xND2ow/u1PzOVCgdjn/q6rjMkP5 m6/krboRwvBQHuwQY+Faw8qwK1IJ+90QBCYUC8Yn9bF3ouPRcoaEmM6zCeu77X5aAab4 mYkg== X-Gm-Message-State: ABy/qLa83CL+0U000sxleI+S5ZK8XVCgBIlLZiACvqylWRf3gV5/Uy7n KWC2laLHtAuYh6S2tATSaJQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APBJJlF7P9V/kiplYnzpb1Y2LwJnwM6kK74EjM2VTY6lSRPH2VL3wq08AqFAaBhX5xeT/KzfDEElkg== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:50c6:0:b0:314:748:d59d with SMTP id f6-20020a5d50c6000000b003140748d59dmr2203910wrt.27.1690467764350; Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:22:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.101] (cpc154979-craw9-2-0-cust193.16-3.cable.virginm.net. [80.193.200.194]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id l6-20020a5d4806000000b003143ac73fd0sm2267865wrq.1.2023.07.27.07.22.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:22:43 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <0012c64a-26cb-131d-7abb-29f6741af944@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 15:22:42 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Michael Roth Cc: Brijesh Singh , Borislav Petkov , x86@kernel.org, "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" From: "Colin King (gmail)" Subject: potential null pointer dereference in setup_cpuid_table Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, Static analysis with cppcheck found a potential null pointer dereference in function setup_cpuid_table in arch/x86/kernel/sev-shared.c as follows: if (!cc_info || !cc_info->cpuid_phys || cc_info->cpuid_len < PAGE_SIZE) sev_es_terminate(SEV_TERM_SET_LINUX, GHCB_TERM_CPUID); cpuid_table_fw = (const struct snp_cpuid_table *)cc_info->cpuid_phys; cc_info is being null checked, so it's potentially null, however, the assignment to cpuid_table_fw is dereferencing cc_info. Either cc_info is never null and the null check is redundant, or there is a potential null pointer dereference. Colin