Re: [RFC PATCH] RDMA/bnxt_re: Fix OOB write in bnxt_re_copy_err_stats()

[Ding Hui <dinghui@sangfor.com.cn>]

On 2025/12/21 23:47, Kalesh Anakkur Purayil wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 8, 2025 at 12:52 PM Ding Hui <dinghui@sangfor.com.cn> wrote:
>>
>> Recently we encountered an OOB write issue on BCM957414A4142CC with outbox
>> NetXtreme-E-235.1.160.0 driver from broadcom. After a litte research,
>> we found the inbox driver from upstream maybe have the same issue.
>>
>> The commit ef56081d1864 ("RDMA/bnxt_re: RoCE related hardware counters
>> update") introduced 3 counters, and appended after BNXT_RE_OUT_OF_SEQ_ERR.
>>
>> However, BNXT_RE_OUT_OF_SEQ_ERR serves as a boundary marker for allocating
>> hw stats with different num_counters for chip_gen_p5_p7 hardware.
>>
>> For BNXT_RE_NUM_STD_COUNTERS allocated hw_stats, leading to an
>> out-of-bounds write in bnxt_re_copy_err_stats().
>>
>> It seems like that the BNXT_RE_REQ_CQE_ERROR, BNXT_RE_RESP_CQE_ERROR,
>> and BNXT_RE_RESP_REMOTE_ACCESS_ERRS can be updated for generic hardware,
>> not only for p5/p7 hardware.
>>
>> Fix this by moving them before BNXT_RE_OUT_OF_SEQ_ERR so they become
>> part of the generic counter.
>>
>> Compile tested only.
>>
>> Fixes: ef56081d1864 ("RDMA/bnxt_re: RoCE related hardware counters update")
>> Reported-by: Yingying Zheng <zhengyingying@sangfor.com.cn>
>> Signed-off-by: Ding Hui <dinghui@sangfor.com.cn>
> 
> Thank you Ding, the fix looks good to me and I have verified it locally.
> 

Thanks for confirming.

Do I need to resend the patch without RFC prefix and update some commit log,
such as getting rid of the first paragraph about the outbox driver?

> Reviewed-by: Kalesh AP <kalesh-anakkur.purayil@broadcom.com>
> Tested-by: Kalesh AP <kalesh-anakkur.purayil@broadcom.com>
> 

-- 
Thanks,
- Ding Hui