[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 Konstantin Belousov changed: What|Removed |Added Resolution|--- |FIXED Status|In

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 Ed Maste changed: What|Removed |Added Status|New |In Progress -- You are receiving this

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #8 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: kib Date: Fri May 20 19:50:33 UTC 2016 New revision: 300332 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/300332 Log: Check for overflow and return EI

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #7 from CTurt --- Yes, as I said before, the change for `i` to unsigned is also good. This latest patch fixes all my concerns. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #6 from Konstantin Belousov --- Created attachment 170517 --> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=170517&action=edit amd64 + i386 overflow check -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee fo

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #5 from Konstantin Belousov --- (In reply to Konstantin Belousov from comment #3) Hm, ok. Still I think that the change of i to unsigned is for better. And, don't we have the same issue on i386 ? -- You are receiving this ma

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #4 from CTurt --- That negative loop was indeed my original theory I was trying to explain, however I no longer think that this is true. In the loop `i` is compared against an unsigned value, so an unsigned comparison will be us

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 Konstantin Belousov changed: What|Removed |Added CC||k...@freebsd.org --- Comment

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #2 from CTurt --- Sorry, I made a mistake in my report; the bound check is incorrect, as described, however, no negative array index will occur from this since an unsigned comparison is used in the loop. The impact is simply tha

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 --- Comment #1 from commit-h...@freebsd.org --- A commit references this bug: Author: kib Date: Fri May 20 15:32:48 UTC 2016 New revision: 300305 URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/300305 Log: Use unsigned type for the loop i

[Bug 209661] amd64_set_ioperm overflow

https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=209661 Bug ID: 209661 Summary: amd64_set_ioperm overflow Product: Base System Version: 11.0-CURRENT Hardware: amd64 OS: Any Status: New Severity: Affects O