From 606636dcbdbb73b1a4ed61be77c76ea1087f042d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2021 10:01:09 +0800 Subject: [PATCH] iommu/vt-d: Fix out-bounds-warning in intel/svm.c Replace a couple of calls to memcpy() with simple assignments in order to fix the following out-of-bounds warning: drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c:1198:4: warning: 'memcpy' offset [25, 32] from the object at 'desc' is out of the bounds of referenced subobject 'qw2' with type 'long long unsigned int' at offset 16 [-Warray-bounds] The problem is that the original code is trying to copy data into a couple of struct members adjacent to each other in a single call to memcpy(). This causes a legitimate compiler warning because memcpy() overruns the length of &desc.qw2 and &resp.qw2, respectively. This helps with the ongoing efforts to globally enable -Warray-bounds and get us closer to being able to tighten the FORTIFY_SOURCE routines on memcpy(). Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/109 Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva Signed-off-by: Lu Baolu Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210414201403.GA392764@embeddedor Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210610020115.1637656-18-baolu.lu@linux.intel.com Signed-off-by: Joerg Roedel --- drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c b/drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c index 6bff9a7f91336..9b0f22bc0514e 100644 --- a/drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c +++ b/drivers/iommu/intel/svm.c @@ -870,8 +870,8 @@ static int intel_svm_prq_report(struct intel_iommu *iommu, struct device *dev, */ event.fault.prm.flags |= IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQUEST_LAST_PAGE; event.fault.prm.flags |= IOMMU_FAULT_PAGE_REQUEST_PRIV_DATA; - memcpy(event.fault.prm.private_data, desc->priv_data, - sizeof(desc->priv_data)); + event.fault.prm.private_data[0] = desc->priv_data[0]; + event.fault.prm.private_data[1] = desc->priv_data[1]; } else if (dmar_latency_enabled(iommu, DMAR_LATENCY_PRQ)) { /* * If the private data fields are not used by hardware, use it @@ -910,11 +910,15 @@ static void handle_bad_prq_event(struct intel_iommu *iommu, QI_PGRP_RESP_TYPE; desc.qw1 = QI_PGRP_IDX(req->prg_index) | QI_PGRP_LPIG(req->lpig); - desc.qw2 = 0; - desc.qw3 = 0; - if (req->priv_data_present) - memcpy(&desc.qw2, req->priv_data, sizeof(req->priv_data)); + if (req->priv_data_present) { + desc.qw2 = req->priv_data[0]; + desc.qw3 = req->priv_data[1]; + } else { + desc.qw2 = 0; + desc.qw3 = 0; + } + qi_submit_sync(iommu, &desc, 1, 0); } @@ -1176,12 +1180,14 @@ int intel_svm_page_response(struct device *dev, desc.qw1 = QI_PGRP_IDX(prm->grpid) | QI_PGRP_LPIG(last_page); desc.qw2 = 0; desc.qw3 = 0; - if (private_present) - memcpy(&desc.qw2, prm->private_data, - sizeof(prm->private_data)); - else if (prm->private_data[0]) + + if (private_present) { + desc.qw2 = prm->private_data[0]; + desc.qw3 = prm->private_data[1]; + } else if (prm->private_data[0]) { dmar_latency_update(iommu, DMAR_LATENCY_PRQ, ktime_to_ns(ktime_get()) - prm->private_data[0]); + } qi_submit_sync(iommu, &desc, 1, 0); } -- 2.30.2