From: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@gmail.com>
To: bhe@redhat.com
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, bp@alien8.de,
dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dyoung@redhat.com,
hbathini@linux.ibm.com, hpa@zytor.com, kexec@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
seanjc@google.com, tglx@linutronix.de, tiwai@suse.de,
vgoyal@redhat.com, x86@kernel.org, ytcoode@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crash_core: optimize crash_exclude_mem_range()
Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2024 23:20:46 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240102152046.111961-1-ytcoode@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZY/wtvltzGR0CokV@MiWiFi-R3L-srv>
On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 18:28:06 +0800, Baoquan He <bhe@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 12/29/23 at 12:10pm, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 00:34:18 +0800 Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Because memory ranges in mem->ranges are stored in ascending order, when we
> > > detect `p_end < start`, we can break the for loop early, as the subsequent
> > > memory ranges must also be outside the range we are looking for.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Yuntao Wang <ytcoode@gmail.com>
> > > ---
> > > Hi Andrew,
> > >
> > > Patch "[PATCH 2/2] crash_core: fix out-of-bounds access check in
> > > crash_exclude_mem_range()" can be ignored, use this patch instead.
> > >
> >
> > Some reviewer input on this would be helpful please?
>
>
> I suggested this in below discussion thread:
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/ZYEOshALGbDKwSdc@MiWiFi-R3L-srv/T/#u
>
> So it would be good if squashing this into patch 3 of another patch
> thread you are asking:
> [PATCH 3/3] crash_core: fix and simplify the logic of crash_exclude_mem_range()
>
Hi all,
I've squashed this patch into the patch:
[PATCH 3/3] crash_core: fix and simplify the logic of crash_exclude_mem_range()
The link to the new patch is:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240102144905.110047-1-ytcoode@gmail.com/t/#m255d0d26148f2b384f6b7ab77eb38edf3f1bc0df
> And I would suggest withdrawing Yuntao's below patch on your
> mm-nonmm-unstable branch.
>
> 961c69e9f1bf x86/crash: fix potential cmem->ranges array overflow
>
> Becase there's better one to fix the potential oob from fuqiang,
> although fuqiang need improve his patch log.
>
> [PATCH v3] x86/kexec: fix potential cmem->ranges out of bounds
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231222121855.148215-1-fuqiang.wang@easystack.cn/T/#u
>
I'm okay with that.
> >
> > > --- a/kernel/crash_core.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/crash_core.c
> > > @@ -575,9 +575,12 @@ int crash_exclude_mem_range(struct crash_mem *mem,
> > > p_start = mstart;
> > > p_end = mend;
> > >
> > > - if (p_start > end || p_end < start)
> > > + if (p_start > end)
> > > continue;
> > >
> > > + if (p_end < start)
> > > + break;
> > > +
> > > /* Truncate any area outside of range */
> > > if (p_start < start)
> > > p_start = start;
> > > --
> > > 2.43.0
> >
_______________________________________________
kexec mailing list
kexec@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/kexec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-02 15:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-18 8:19 [PATCH 0/2] crash: fix potential cmem->ranges array overflow Yuntao Wang
2023-12-18 8:19 ` [PATCH 1/2] x86/crash: " Yuntao Wang
2023-12-18 8:19 ` [PATCH 2/2] crash_core: fix out-of-bounds access check in crash_exclude_mem_range() Yuntao Wang
2023-12-18 17:29 ` Andrew Morton
2023-12-19 2:02 ` Yuntao Wang
2023-12-19 3:32 ` Baoquan He
2023-12-19 4:31 ` Yuntao Wang
2023-12-19 14:22 ` Baoquan He
2023-12-19 16:00 ` Yuntao Wang
2023-12-19 16:34 ` [PATCH] crash_core: optimize crash_exclude_mem_range() Yuntao Wang
2023-12-29 20:10 ` Andrew Morton
2023-12-30 10:28 ` Baoquan He
2024-01-02 15:20 ` Yuntao Wang [this message]
2023-12-18 13:45 ` [PATCH 0/2] crash: fix potential cmem->ranges array overflow Baoquan He
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=20240102152046.111961-1-ytcoode@gmail.com \
--to=ytcoode@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bhe@redhat.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dyoung@redhat.com \
--cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kexec@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).