Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 19:03:24 +0100 From: Edward Tomasz Napierala <trasz@freebsd.org> To: Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Cc: Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org>, src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "<dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>" <dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org>, dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: 0f206cc91279 - main - cam: add missing zeroing of a stack-allocated CCB. Message-ID: <YKFebPTnf1jCZtkD@brick> In-Reply-To: <CANCZdfrPuWJeH4xK6Z0E1c2s6fvn5_tcwd0wN%2Bs7R-aKD61zqQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <202105161045.14GAjZIL093217@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <YKFOeDlJhm8sJHJX@nuc> <CANCZdfrPuWJeH4xK6Z0E1c2s6fvn5_tcwd0wN%2Bs7R-aKD61zqQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 0516T1227, Warner Losh wrote: > On Sun, May 16, 2021, 11:55 AM Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > On Sun, May 16, 2021 at 10:45:35AM +0000, Edward Tomasz Napierala wrote: > > > The branch main has been updated by trasz: > > > > > > URL: > > https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=0f206cc91279e630ad9e733eb6e330b7dbe6c70e > > > > > > commit 0f206cc91279e630ad9e733eb6e330b7dbe6c70e > > > Author: Edward Tomasz Napierala <trasz@FreeBSD.org> > > > AuthorDate: 2021-05-16 09:28:04 +0000 > > > Commit: Edward Tomasz Napierala <trasz@FreeBSD.org> > > > CommitDate: 2021-05-16 10:38:26 +0000 > > > > > > cam: add missing zeroing of a stack-allocated CCB. > > > > > > This could cause a panic at boot. > > > > There are other instances of this, for example syzbot is currently > > hitting an assertion, seemingly because the alloc_flags field of a > > stack-allocated CCB was not zeroed: > > https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=2e9ce63919709feb3d1c > > > > I think the patch below will fix it, but I did not audit other callers. > > It feels a bit strange to require all callers of xpt_setup_ccb() to > > manually zero the structure first, can we provide a single routine to > > initialize stack-allocated CCBs? We definitely could, although in some cases it's a bit more complicated than that - a function that gets passed a CCB and then calls xpt_setup_ccb() to fill it shouldn't zero it, as that would be making assumption on how the CCB passed to it was allocated. Now that I look at the code, I can definitely see that I've missed a couple of places. Perhaps I should replace those two KASSERTs with diagnostic printfs for now, until I get that sorted out? > If we did, we could set a flag we could assert on, and/or do static > analysis to find any others... That sounds promising, except I've never done anything like that; I don't even know where to start.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YKFebPTnf1jCZtkD>