mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@realtek.com>
To: "lizetao1@huawei.com" <lizetao1@huawei.com>
Cc: "davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"kvalo@kernel.org" <kvalo@kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net" <Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net>,
	"kuba@kernel.org" <kuba@kernel.org>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"linville@tuxdriver.com" <linville@tuxdriver.com>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] rtlwifi: rtl8821ae: Fix global-out-of-bounds bug in _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit()
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2022 11:21:40 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <66c119cc4e184a36d525a07f2fbd092348839610.camel@realtek.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221210162336.1383856-1-lizetao1@huawei.com>

On Sun, 2022-12-11 at 00:23 +0800, Li Zetao wrote:
> There is a global-out-of-bounds reported by KASAN:
> 
>   BUG: KASAN: global-out-of-bounds in
>   _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte.part.0+0x3d/0x84 [rtl8821ae]
>   Read of size 1 at addr ffffffffa0773c43 by task NetworkManager/411
> 
>   CPU: 6 PID: 411 Comm: NetworkManager Tainted: G      D
>   6.1.0-rc8+ #144 e15588508517267d37
>   Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009),
>   Call Trace:
>    <TASK>
>    ...
>    kasan_report+0xbb/0x1c0
>    _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte.part.0+0x3d/0x84 [rtl8821ae]
>    rtl8821ae_phy_bb_config.cold+0x346/0x641 [rtl8821ae]
>    rtl8821ae_hw_init+0x1f5e/0x79b0 [rtl8821ae]
>    ...
>    </TASK>
> 
> The root cause of the problem is that the comparison order of
> "prate_section" in _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit() is wrong. The
> _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() is used to compare the first n bytes of the two
> strings from tail to head, which causes the problem. In the
> _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit(), it was originally intended to meet
> this requirement by carefully designing the comparison order.
> For example, "pregulation" and "pbandwidth" are compared in order of
> length from small to large, first is 3 and last is 4. However, the
> comparison order of "prate_section" dose not obey such order requirement,
> therefore when "prate_section" is "HT", when comparing from tail to head,
> it will lead to access out of bounds in _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(). As
> mentioned above, the _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() has the same function as
> strcmp(), so just strcmp() is enough.
> 
> Fix it by replacing _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() with strcmp(). Although it
> can be fixed by adjusting the comparison order of "prate_section", this
> may cause the value of "rate_section" to not be from 0 to 5. In
> addition, commit "21e4b0726dc6" not only moved driver from staging to
> regular tree, but also added setting txpower limit function during the
> driver config phase, so the problem was introduced by this commit.
> 
> Fixes: 21e4b0726dc6 ("rtlwifi: rtl8821ae: Move driver from staging to regular tree")
> Signed-off-by: Li Zetao <lizetao1@huawei.com>
> ---
> v1 was posted at: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221207152319.3135500-1-lizetao1@huawei.com/
> v1 -> v2: delete the third parameter of _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() and use
> strcmp to replace loop comparison.
> 
>  .../wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c  | 51 ++++++++-----------
>  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c
> index a29321e2fa72..14b569d7d8fa 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtlwifi/rtl8821ae/phy.c
> @@ -1598,16 +1598,9 @@ static bool _rtl8812ae_get_integer_from_string(const char *str, u8 *pint)
>  	return true;
>  }
>  
> -static bool _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(const char *str1, const char *str2, u32 num)
> +static bool _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(const char *str1, const char *str2)
>  {
> -	if (num == 0)
> -		return false;
> -	while (num > 0) {
> -		num--;
> -		if (str1[num] != str2[num])
> -			return false;
> -	}
> -	return true;
> +	return strcmp(str1, str2) == 0;
>  }

I suggest to remove _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte() and use strcmp() barely.
That would be more clear, and people don't need to check detail of
unnecessary _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte().


>  
>  static s8 _rtl8812ae_phy_get_chnl_idx_of_txpwr_lmt(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
> @@ -1659,42 +1652,42 @@ static void _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
>  	power_limit = power_limit > MAX_POWER_INDEX ?
>  		      MAX_POWER_INDEX : power_limit;
>  
> -	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "FCC", 3))
> +	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "FCC"))
>  		regulation = 0;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "MKK", 3))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "MKK"))
>  		regulation = 1;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "ETSI", 4))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "ETSI"))
>  		regulation = 2;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "WW13", 4))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pregulation, "WW13"))
>  		regulation = 3;
>  
> -	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "CCK", 3))
> +	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "CCK"))
>  		rate_section = 0;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "OFDM", 4))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "OFDM"))
>  		rate_section = 1;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "HT", 2) &&
> -		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "1T", 2))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "HT") &&
> +		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "1T"))
>  		rate_section = 2;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "HT", 2) &&
> -		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "2T", 2))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "HT") &&
> +		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "2T"))
>  		rate_section = 3;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "VHT", 3) &&
> -		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "1T", 2))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "VHT") &&
> +		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "1T"))
>  		rate_section = 4;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "VHT", 3) &&
> -		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "2T", 2))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prate_section, "VHT") &&
> +		 _rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(prf_path, "2T"))
>  		rate_section = 5;
>  
> -	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "20M", 3))
> +	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "20M"))
>  		bandwidth = 0;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "40M", 3))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "40M"))
>  		bandwidth = 1;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "80M", 3))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "80M"))
>  		bandwidth = 2;
> -	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "160M", 4))
> +	else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pbandwidth, "160M"))
>  		bandwidth = 3;
>  
> -	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pband, "2.4G", 4)) {
> +	if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pband, "2.4G")) {
>  		ret = _rtl8812ae_phy_get_chnl_idx_of_txpwr_lmt(hw,
>  							       BAND_ON_2_4G,
>  							       channel);
> @@ -1718,7 +1711,7 @@ static void _rtl8812ae_phy_set_txpower_limit(struct ieee80211_hw *hw,
>  			regulation, bandwidth, rate_section, channel_index,
>  			rtlphy->txpwr_limit_2_4g[regulation][bandwidth]
>  				[rate_section][channel_index][RF90_PATH_A]);
> -	} else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pband, "5G", 2)) {
> +	} else if (_rtl8812ae_eq_n_byte(pband, "5G")) {
>  		ret = _rtl8812ae_phy_get_chnl_idx_of_txpwr_lmt(hw,
>  							       BAND_ON_5G,
>  							       channel);
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
> 
> ------Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-11 11:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-07 15:23 [PATCH] " Li Zetao
2022-12-09  5:11 ` Ping-Ke Shih
2022-12-10 12:47   ` Li Zetao
2022-12-10 13:15     ` Ping-Ke Shih
2022-12-10 13:52       ` Li Zetao
2022-12-10 16:23   ` [PATCH v2] " Li Zetao
2022-12-11 11:21     ` Ping-Ke Shih [this message]
2022-12-12  2:35       ` [PATCH v3] " Li Zetao
2022-12-12  1:35         ` Ping-Ke Shih
2022-12-12  1:37         ` Ping-Ke Shih
2022-12-12  2:58           ` [PATCH v4] wifi: rtlwifi: " Li Zetao
2022-12-14 12:27             ` Kalle Valo

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=66c119cc4e184a36d525a07f2fbd092348839610.camel@realtek.com \
    --to=pkshih@realtek.com \
    --cc=Larry.Finger@lwfinger.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=kvalo@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linville@tuxdriver.com \
    --cc=lizetao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®