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 2063BCE7A96 for ; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 15:44:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233281AbjIYPoY (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2023 11:44:24 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46448 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233287AbjIYPoG (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Sep 2023 11:44:06 -0400 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.55.52.151]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E25F0E66; Mon, 25 Sep 2023 08:43:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1695656614; x=1727192614; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id: references:mime-version; bh=KBtV9Wt5TwMqqcq4D9cO2jjNjTy6l+lb5oWWBcyEU1Q=; b=JlC5QpAYi6V08OoibbDy269r7g8ybSxZgYnffJoMyZ3iUTxRWvCrMuZ8 hxuVwJLj7pH1uzU+3ttlAvm1IzOXX/wEvcyrvFFnPfvwFz6HjBlbz3G7X xdExxJRv8KF0J2J+f1E2lK9ARn6Q3VGDzQ2ctth7asXLVuYayiHUBgS5G Wkt08yowhaJhdwh8EG+rzQftXXyQ0mdzAQAl+fKVJ38c7o+qisrSezQIH cJkks/yy1O3xMpVzCHn5N6QhIBXsVW7cE1P2FPL+GplNk73JfbbE93qPD r60kVY2OY+kguPuj3lpbMRZvm3MqO/ZgZHH0nmJMakrQX2KxnIUzDQ5rS g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10843"; a="361536153" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,175,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="361536153" Received: from orsmga004.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.38]) by fmsmga107.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Sep 2023 08:43:33 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10843"; a="872090067" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.03,175,1694761200"; d="scan'208";a="872090067" Received: from stamengx-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com ([10.249.32.149]) by orsmga004-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Sep 2023 08:43:27 -0700 Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2023 18:43:24 +0300 (EEST) From: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= To: Jithu Joseph cc: Hans de Goede , markgross@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, ashok.raj@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, LKML , platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev, ravi.v.shankar@intel.com, pengfei.xu@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] platform/x86/intel/ifs: Validate image size In-Reply-To: <20230922232606.1928026-6-jithu.joseph@intel.com> Message-ID: <318e7426-fcab-c1e4-6e84-752c332088f2@linux.intel.com> References: <20230913183348.1349409-1-jithu.joseph@intel.com> <20230922232606.1928026-1-jithu.joseph@intel.com> <20230922232606.1928026-6-jithu.joseph@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 22 Sep 2023, Jithu Joseph wrote: > Perform additional validation prior to loading IFS image. > > Error out if the size of the file being loaded doesn't match the size > specified in the header. > > Signed-off-by: Jithu Joseph > Reviewed-by: Tony Luck > Tested-by: Pengfei Xu > --- > drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c | 8 ++++++++ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c > index 6b827247945b..b09106034fac 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/intel/ifs/load.c > @@ -375,6 +375,7 @@ int ifs_load_firmware(struct device *dev) > { > const struct ifs_test_caps *test = ifs_get_test_caps(dev); > struct ifs_data *ifsd = ifs_get_data(dev); > + unsigned int expected_size; > const struct firmware *fw; > char scan_path[64]; > int ret = -EINVAL; > @@ -389,6 +390,13 @@ int ifs_load_firmware(struct device *dev) > goto done; > } > > + expected_size = ((struct microcode_header_intel *)fw->data)->totalsize; > + if (fw->size != expected_size) { > + dev_err(dev, "File size mismatch (expected %d, actual %ld). Corrupted IFS image.\n", > + expected_size, fw->size); > + return -EBADFD; I don't think this error code is best suited for what occurred. I guess returning just -EINVAL would be fine. -- i. > + } > + > ret = image_sanity_check(dev, (struct microcode_header_intel *)fw->data); > if (ret) > goto release; >