3.2-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org>
commit 3118a4f652c7b12c752f3222af0447008f9b2368 upstream.
It is possible to wrap the counter used to allocate the buffer for
relocation copies. This could lead to heap writing overflows.
CVE-2013-0913
v3: collapse test, improve comment
v2: move check into validate_exec_list
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org>
Reported-by: Pinkie Pie
Reviewed-by: Chris Wilson <ch...@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vet...@ffwll.ch>
Signed-off-by: Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk>
---
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c | 11 ++++++++---
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
--- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
+++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_execbuffer.c
@@ -907,15 +907,20 @@ validate_exec_list(struct drm_i915_gem_e
int count)
{
int i;
+ int relocs_total = 0;
+ int relocs_max = INT_MAX / sizeof(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry);
for (i = 0; i < count; i++) {
char __user *ptr = (char __user *)(uintptr_t)exec[i].relocs_ptr;
int length; /* limited by fault_in_pages_readable() */
- /* First check for malicious input causing overflow */
- if (exec[i].relocation_count >
- INT_MAX / sizeof(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry))
+ /* First check for malicious input causing overflow in
+ * the worst case where we need to allocate the entire
+ * relocation tree as a single array.
+ */
+ if (exec[i].relocation_count > relocs_max - relocs_total)
return -EINVAL;
+ relocs_total += exec[i].relocation_count;
length = exec[i].relocation_count *
sizeof(struct drm_i915_gem_relocation_entry);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
