Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 Nov 2018 17:36:16 +0000
From:      bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org
To:        bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   [Bug 231515] Potential out-of-bounds access in function pmap_bootstrap (sys/riscv/riscv/pmap.c)
Message-ID:  <bug-231515-227-u6EKGKKJok@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-231515-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
References:  <bug-231515-227@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D231515

Mark Johnston <markj@FreeBSD.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|New                         |In Progress
           Assignee|bugs@FreeBSD.org            |markj@FreeBSD.org

--- Comment #2 from Mark Johnston <markj@FreeBSD.org> ---
Created attachment 199144
  --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=3D199144&action=
=3Dedit
proposed patch

I don't understand the need for the first hunk of the patch.  In the for-lo=
op,
avail_slot is only used to index phys_avail[], which has size PHYSMAP_SIZE+=
2.=20
In the second hunk, we should test avail_slot < PHYS_AVAIL_SIZE - 2 before
using avail_slot as an index.

However, I don't quite understand the code in the second hunk.  It's checki=
ng
whether the loop exited because it found a physmem range containing KERNBAS=
E -
kern_delta, so why is it using avail_slot as the index?  I think the test is
just wrong.  The attached patch changes that code according to my understan=
d of
what it's supposed to be doing.

--=20
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.=



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-231515-227-u6EKGKKJok>