[patch] drm/amdgpu: missing bounds check in amdgpu_set_pp_force_state()

[Christian König]

Am 16.06.2016 um 09:54 schrieb Dan Carpenter:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 09:26:03AM +0200, walter harms wrote:
>>
>> Am 16.06.2016 08:41, schrieb Dan Carpenter:
>>> There is no limit on high "idx" can go.  It should be less than
>>> ARRAY_SIZE(data.states) which is 16.
>>>
>>> The "data" variable wasn't declared in that scope so I shifted the code
>>> around a bit to make it work.
>>>
>>> Fixes: f3898ea12fc1 ('drm/amd/powerplay: add some sysfs interfaces for powerplay.')
>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com>
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_pm.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_pm.c
>>> index 589b36e..ce9e97f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_pm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/amd/amdgpu/amdgpu_pm.c
>>> @@ -275,25 +275,23 @@ static ssize_t amdgpu_set_pp_force_state(struct device *dev,
>>>   
>>>   	if (strlen(buf) == 1)
>>>   		adev->pp_force_state_enabled = false;
>>> -	else {
>>> -		ret = kstrtol(buf, 0, &idx);
>>> +	else if (adev->pp_enabled) {
>>> +		struct pp_states_info data;
>>>   
>>> -		if (ret) {
>>> +		ret = kstrtol(buf, 0, &idx);
>>> +		if (ret || idx >= ARRAY_SIZE(data.states)) {
>>>   			count = -EINVAL;
>>>   			goto fail;
>>>   		}
>>
>> i would also expect a check idx < 0, does it mean this can not happen ?
>> otherwise maybe kstrtoul is a solution ?
> The original code could underflow, but my code can't.  ARRAY_SIZE()
> means the comparison is type promoted to size_t which is unsigned long.

That's probably true, but not very obvious (not that I understand much 
of the power related code anyway).

Using kstrtoul() in the first place would make it a bit less obscure and 
probably generate a nice error code when somebody really tries to use a 
negative index here.

Cheers,
Christian.

> regards,
> dan carpenter
>