Re: [stable] [PATCH 1/2] sd: fix memory corruption by sd_read_cache_type

[Stefan Richter]

Al Viro wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 11:14:48PM -0600, James Bottomley wrote:
...
> > The problem is that it's a change
> > to sd and a change to scsi_lib in a fairly critical routine.  While I'm
> > reasonably certain the change is safe, I'd prefer to make sure by
> > incubating in -mm for a while.
> >
> > The title, by the way, is misleading; it's not a memory corruption in sd
> > at all really.  It's the initio bridge which produces a totally
> > standards non conformant return to a mode sense which produces the
> > problem.  And so, it's only the single initio bridge which is currently
> > affected; hence the caution.
>
> No.  It's sd.c assuming that mode page header is sane, without any
> checks.  And yes, it does give memory corruption if it's not.
>
> Initio-related part is in scsi_lib.c (and in recovery part of sd.c
> changes).  That one is about how we can handle gracefully a broken
> device that gives no header at all.
>
> Checks for ->block_descriptors_length are just making sure we won't try
> to do any access past the end of buffer, no matter what crap we got from
> device.

That's why I split Al's patch. Part 1/2 prevents sd from using values 
from buggy firmwares to overwrite memory where sd has no business to 
write at. As Al explained, the culprit is sd which feeds a too big len 
to scsi_mode_sense()'s memset(buffer, 0, len). Patch 2/2 adds an Initio 
specific workaround. (The 2nd part is not necessarily material for 
-stable, although it assures correct cache handling for Initio based 
SBP-2 HDDs.)

Please merge the sd fix ASAP (part 1/2). Users _are_ seeing memory 
corruption or panic in interrupt context without this patch. Fully 
reproducable, probably with all Initio SBP-2 bridges which exist; and 
these are actually popular chips for 1394a S400 as well as 1394b S800 
products, both noname and branded products.

The 2nd part could perhaps go through -mm. If you wish I resend it to 
Andrew. Al, what do you think? I believe this patch to be safe for 
non-broken devices though.

BTW I missed a small whitespace mishap in pt 2/2 which is why I should 
repost it anyway:
-+		} else if(use_10_for_ms) {
++		} else if (use_10_for_ms) {
--
Stefan Richter
-=====-=-==- --=- ==-=-
http://arcgraph.de/sr/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/