On 7/25/23 10:30, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
Simplify the check for an overlap of the loaded image and SPL.
Detect all cases of wrap around.
Use the SPL_TPL_NAME prefix to avoid printing 'SPL' in TPL (both spl_parse_legacy_header and spl_parse_legacy_validate).
Fixes: 77aed22b48ab ("spl: spl_legacy: Add extra address checks") Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt heinrich.schuchardt@canonical.com
v2: consider wrap around fix TPL prefix
@Marek:
You suggested to carve out a function for memory region overlaps. A function call for two comparisons would increase code size.
Even if the function is inlined ?
Introducing LMB for SPL would run into code size limitations and is beyond the scope of a simple fix.
common/spl/spl_legacy.c | 16 ++++++++-------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/common/spl/spl_legacy.c b/common/spl/spl_legacy.c index 095443c63d..dd91e1077b 100644 --- a/common/spl/spl_legacy.c +++ b/common/spl/spl_legacy.c @@ -22,14 +22,14 @@ static void spl_parse_legacy_validate(uintptr_t start, uintptr_t size) uintptr_t spl_end = (uintptr_t)_image_binary_end; uintptr_t end = start + size;
- if ((start >= spl_start && start < spl_end) ||
(end > spl_start && end <= spl_end) ||(start < spl_start && end >= spl_end) ||(start > end && end > spl_start))panic("SPL: Image overlaps SPL\n");
- if (end > spl_start && start < spl_end)
panic(SPL_TPL_NAME ": Image overlaps SPL\n");- if (start >= end)
Really >= ? start == end means zero-size payload, no ?
Btw the extra string that is being printed here also increases code size, which might blow on at91.