Le 18/08/2021 à 08:05, Kees Cook a écrit :
In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time
field bounds checking for memset(), avoid intentionally writing across
neighboring fields.
Instead of writing across a field boundary with memset(), move the call
to just the array, and an explicit zeroing of the prior field.
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <[email protected]>
Cc: Qinglang Miao <[email protected]>
Cc: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <[email protected]>
Cc: Hulk Robot <[email protected]>
Cc: Wang Wensheng <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Michael Ellerman <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]
---
drivers/macintosh/smu.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/macintosh/smu.c b/drivers/macintosh/smu.c
index 94fb63a7b357..59ce431da7ef 100644
--- a/drivers/macintosh/smu.c
+++ b/drivers/macintosh/smu.c
@@ -848,7 +848,8 @@ int smu_queue_i2c(struct smu_i2c_cmd *cmd)
cmd->read = cmd->info.devaddr & 0x01;
switch(cmd->info.type) {
case SMU_I2C_TRANSFER_SIMPLE:
- memset(&cmd->info.sublen, 0, 4);
+ cmd->info.sublen = 0;
+ memset(&cmd->info.subaddr, 0, 3);
subaddr[] is a table, should the & be avoided ?
And while at it, why not use sizeof(subaddr) instead of 3 ?
break;
case SMU_I2C_TRANSFER_COMBINED:
cmd->info.devaddr &= 0xfe;
