From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.groups.io (mail02.groups.io [66.175.222.108]) by spool.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C1D90940CF6 for ; Fri, 10 Nov 2023 03:11:16 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=+0uhSObKSQ64qAsLK7+Ml5yw7en+mWYBhFzqmk5jX4I=; c=relaxed/simple; d=groups.io; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject:To:Cc:Precedence:List-Subscribe:List-Help:Sender:List-Id:Mailing-List:Delivered-To:Reply-To:List-Unsubscribe-Post:List-Unsubscribe:Content-Type; s=20140610; t=1699585875; v=1; b=r8gelMV0dyoqJfIKRJdbDCvqMX4db9rUbmk0wTATqOP3GQptu7/gi+Th8/GkarrolGq6NXs2 61Jeu/XRR0Y+/xjFtLdJStuUSQ6Gmku2kUMBGoWeCdmaCR9ENG/vS0uLIDQPPsvoj49Jsxdp7w1 CFdCGlAZRFcssx5yjeT2VFCA= X-Received: by 127.0.0.2 with SMTP id BAYFYY7687511x91qAgZJwyH; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 19:11:15 -0800 X-Received: from mail-pf1-f177.google.com (mail-pf1-f177.google.com [209.85.210.177]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web10.20349.1699585874477425318 for ; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 19:11:14 -0800 X-Received: by mail-pf1-f177.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-6b709048f32so1499402b3a.0 for ; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 19:11:14 -0800 (PST) X-Gm-Message-State: HUpHmudpvWH683Sag7cLGcrNx7686176AA= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF9TpGKCGzZ8vKPBe4dGrNXp1Xet3ztyg6xdj7qlu5bXxwmU6QnqC175FYtE5kPF1cKSeKKh8JXtYVqIomA3GI= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:6a1d:b0:13a:e955:d958 with SMTP id p29-20020a056a206a1d00b0013ae955d958mr7545255pzk.7.1699585873587; Thu, 09 Nov 2023 19:11:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20231109173908.364630-1-rsingh@ventanamicro.com> <20231109173908.364630-2-rsingh@ventanamicro.com> In-Reply-To: From: "Ranbir Singh" Date: Fri, 10 Nov 2023 08:41:02 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe: Fix OVERRUN Coverity issues To: "Kinney, Michael D" Cc: "devel@edk2.groups.io" , "Ni, Ray" , Veeresh Sangolli Precedence: Bulk List-Subscribe: List-Help: Sender: devel@edk2.groups.io List-Id: Mailing-List: list devel@edk2.groups.io; contact devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Reply-To: devel@edk2.groups.io,rsingh@ventanamicro.com List-Unsubscribe-Post: List-Unsubscribe=One-Click List-Unsubscribe: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000042cdda0609c3ac06" X-GND-Status: LEGIT Authentication-Results: spool.mail.gandi.net; dkim=pass header.d=groups.io header.s=20140610 header.b=r8gelMV0; dmarc=none; spf=pass (spool.mail.gandi.net: domain of bounce@groups.io designates 66.175.222.108 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=bounce@groups.io --00000000000042cdda0609c3ac06 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable As far as I know, from a secure coding perspective, it would be recommended that array overrun condition check is captured in the code even if it is felt that it will never hit. Generally speaking, I won't be in favour of handling other ASSERT conditions updates even if required if they are not related to array overrun conditions i.e., the context of the patch. If someone / PCI maintainers can advise in this patch context what should be done in the array overrun condition, I will be happy to update, otherwise, sorry to say I won't be able to pursue this particular one further and hence would be leaving the related code with the status quo here. On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 2:10=E2=80=AFAM Kinney, Michael D < michael.d.kinney@intel.com> wrote: > Hi Ranbir, > > A deadloop without even a debug print is not good behavior. > > If this condition really represents a condition where it is not possible > to complete the PCI resource allocation/assignment, then an error status > code should be returned to the caller of NotifyPhase(). Perhaps > EFI_OUT_OF_RESOURCES. The other ASSERT() conditions in this API should > likely be updated to do the same. > > This may also require the caller of this service, the PCI Bus Driver, > to be reviewed to make sure it handles error conditions from NotifyPhase(= ). > > I recommend you get help on the proposed code changes from the PCI > subsystem maintainers. > > Thanks, > > Mike > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: devel@edk2.groups.io On Behalf Of Ranbir > > Singh > > Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 9:39 AM > > To: devel@edk2.groups.io; rsingh@ventanamicro.com > > Cc: Ni, Ray ; Veeresh Sangolli > > > > Subject: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2] > > MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe: Fix OVERRUN Coverity issues > > > > From: Ranbir Singh > > > > The function NotifyPhase has a check > > > > ASSERT (Index < TypeMax); > > > > but this comes into play only in DEBUG mode. In Release mode, there is > > no handling if the Index value is within array limits or not. If for > > whatever reasons, the Index does not get re-assigned to Index2 at line > > 937, then it remains at TypeMax as assigned earlier at line 929. This > > poses array overrun risk at lines 942 and 943. It is better to deploy > > a safety check on Index limit before accessing array elements. > > > > REF: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D4212 > > > > Cc: Ray Ni > > Co-authored-by: Veeresh Sangolli > > Signed-off-by: Ranbir Singh > > Signed-off-by: Ranbir Singh > > --- > > MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c | 5 +++++ > > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c > > b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c > > index d573e532bac8..c2c143068cd2 100644 > > --- a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c > > +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c > > @@ -939,6 +939,11 @@ NotifyPhase ( > > } > > > > > > > > ASSERT (Index < TypeMax); > > > > + > > > > + if (Index =3D=3D TypeMax) { > > > > + CpuDeadLoop (); > > > > + } > > > > + > > > > ResNodeHandled[Index] =3D TRUE; > > > > Alignment =3D RootBridge- > > >ResAllocNode[Index].Alignment; > > > > BitsOfAlignment =3D LowBitSet64 (Alignment + 1); > > > > -- > > 2.34.1 > > > > > > > > -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D > > Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > View/Reply Online (#110993): > > https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110993 > > Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102490513/1643496 > > Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io > > Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub > > [michael.d.kinney@intel.com] > > -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D > > > > -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#111007): https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/111007 Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102490513/7686176 Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub [rebecca@openfw.io] -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D- --00000000000042cdda0609c3ac06 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
As far as I know, from a secure coding perspective, i= t would be recommended that array overrun condition check is captured in th= e code even if it=C2=A0is felt that it will never hit.

Generally speaking, I won't be in favour of handling othe= r=C2=A0ASSERT conditions updates=C2=A0even if required if=C2=A0they are not= related=C2=A0to array overrun conditions i.e., the context of the patch.

If someone / PCI maintainers can a= dvise in this patch context what should be done in the array overrun condit= ion, I will be happy to update, otherwise, sorry to say I won't be able= to pursue this particular one further and hence would be leaving the relat= ed code with the status quo here.

On Fri, Nov 10, 2023 at 2:10=E2=80= =AFAM Kinney, Michael D <m= ichael.d.kinney@intel.com> wrote:
Hi Ranbir,

A deadloop without even a debug print is not good behavior.

If this condition really represents a condition where it is not possible to complete the PCI resource allocation/assignment, then an error status code should be returned to the caller of NotifyPhase().=C2=A0 Perhaps
EFI_OUT_OF_RESOURCES.=C2=A0 The other ASSERT() conditions in this API shoul= d
likely be updated to do the same.

This may also require the caller of this service, the PCI Bus Driver,
to be reviewed to make sure it handles error conditions from NotifyPhase().=

I recommend you get help on the proposed code changes from the PCI
subsystem maintainers.

Thanks,

Mike



> -----Original Message-----
> From: devel@= edk2.groups.io <devel@edk2.groups.io> On Behalf Of Ranbir
> Singh
> Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2023 9:39 AM
> To: devel@ed= k2.groups.io; rsingh@ventanamicro.com
> Cc: Ni, Ray <= ray.ni@intel.com>; Veeresh Sangolli
> <veeresh.sangolli@dellteam.com>
> Subject: [edk2-devel] [PATCH v3 1/2]
> MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe: Fix OVERRUN Coverity issues
>
> From: Ranbir Singh <Ranbir.Singh3@Dell.com>
>
> The function NotifyPhase has a check
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0ASSERT (Index < TypeMax);
>
> but this comes into play only in DEBUG mode. In Release mode, there is=
> no handling if the Index value is within array limits or not. If for > whatever reasons, the Index does not get re-assigned to Index2 at line=
> 937, then it remains at TypeMax as assigned earlier at line 929. This<= br> > poses array overrun risk at lines 942 and 943. It is better to deploy<= br> > a safety check on Index limit before accessing array elements.
>
> REF: https://bugzilla.tianocore.org/show_b= ug.cgi?id=3D4212
>
> Cc: Ray Ni <r= ay.ni@intel.com>
> Co-authored-by: Veeresh Sangolli <veeresh.sangolli@dellteam.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ranbir Singh <Ranbir.Singh3@Dell.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ranbir Singh <rsingh@ventanamicro.com>
> ---
>=C2=A0 MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c | 5 +++++<= br> >=C2=A0 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c
> b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c
> index d573e532bac8..c2c143068cd2 100644
> --- a/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c
> +++ b/MdeModulePkg/Bus/Pci/PciHostBridgeDxe/PciHostBridge.c
> @@ -939,6 +939,11 @@ NotifyPhase (
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 }
>
>
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ASSERT (Index < Typ= eMax);
>
> +
>
> +=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 if (Index =3D=3D TypeMax) {=
>
> +=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 CpuDeadLoop ();
>
> +=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 }
>
> +
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 ResNodeHandled[Index] = =3D TRUE;
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Alignment=C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=3D RootBridge-
> >ResAllocNode[Index].Alignment;
>
>=C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 BitsOfAlignment=C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0=3D LowBitSet64 (Alignment + 1);
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>
>
> -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D
> Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
> View/Reply Online (#110993):
> https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/message/110993<= br> > Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/102490513/1643496
> Group Owner: devel+owner@edk2.groups.io
> Unsubscribe: https://edk2.groups.io/g/devel/unsub
> [micha= el.d.kinney@intel.com]
> -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D
>

_._,_._,_
Groups.io Links:

=20 You receive all messages sent to this group. =20 =20

View/Reply Online (#111007) | =20 | Mute= This Topic | New Topic
Your Subscriptio= n | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [rebecca@openfw.io]

_._,_._,_
--00000000000042cdda0609c3ac06--