lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Mar]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] binderfs: Fix the maximum minor value in binderfs_binder_device_create() and binderfs_binder_ctl_create()
From
Le 29/03/2022 à 13:20, Christian Brauner a écrit :
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2022 at 01:18:17PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
>> ida_alloc_max(..., max, ...) returns values from 0 to max, inclusive.
>>
>> So, BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR is a valid value for 'minor'.
>>
>> BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR is '1U << MINORBITS' and we have:
>> #define MKDEV(ma,mi) (((ma) << MINORBITS) | (mi))
>>
>> So, When this value is used in MKDEV() and it will overflow.
>>
>> Fixes: 3ad20fe393b3 ("binder: implement binderfs")
>> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
>> ---
>> This patch is completely speculative.
>>
>> The 'BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR_CAPPED - 1' is here only for symmetry with the
>> BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR case. I'm not sure at all that is is needed and, more
>> importantly, that it is correct.
>
> Hm, since we're "removing" one alloctable device for the initial ipc
> namespace, I think we need the -1 for the capped value.
>
> Though I wonder if the simpler fix wouldn't just be to:
>
> #define BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR MINORMASK
>
> since include/linux/kdev_t.h has:
>
> #define MINORBITS 20
> #define MINORMASK ((1U << MINORBITS) - 1)
>

Hi,
I mostly agree with you, but I don't have a strong opinion on the other
uses of BINDERFS_MAX_MINOR.

The ones related to 'max' values looks good to me, but I don't know the
implication for the one used in binderfs_make_inode() and in
init_binderfs().

I won't be able to help further here.

CJ

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-03-31 22:36    [W:0.042 / U:0.432 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site