Re: [PATCH v2] swiotlb: avoid potential left shift overflow

[Dongli Zhang]

I also encountered this when sending out another version of the 64-bit swiotlb.

https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220609005553.30954-8-dongli.zhang@xxxxxxxxxx/

Unfortunately, I could not find an environment (e.g., powerpc) to allocate more
than 4G until swiotlb supports 64-bit.

Although xen supports 64-bit, but the hypervisor side limits the max to < 4G.

Dongli Zhang

On 8/19/22 1:45 AM, Chao Gao wrote:
> The second operand passed to slot_addr() is declared as int or unsigned int
> in all call sites. The left-shift to get the offset of a slot can overflow
> if swiotlb size is larger than 4G.
> 
> Convert the macro to an inline function and declare the second argument as
> phys_addr_t to avoid the potential overflow.
> 
> Fixes: 26a7e094783d ("swiotlb: refactor swiotlb_tbl_map_single")
> Signed-off-by: Chao Gao <chao.gao@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/dma/swiotlb.c | 5 ++++-
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> index c5a9190b218f..41ea9fb3efe1 100644
> --- a/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> +++ b/kernel/dma/swiotlb.c
> @@ -579,7 +579,10 @@ static void swiotlb_bounce(struct device *dev, phys_addr_t tlb_addr, size_t size
>  	}
>  }
>  
> -#define slot_addr(start, idx)	((start) + ((idx) << IO_TLB_SHIFT))
> +static inline phys_addr_t slot_addr(phys_addr_t start, phys_addr_t idx)
> +{
> +	return start + (idx << IO_TLB_SHIFT);
> +}
>  
>  /*
>   * Carefully handle integer overflow which can occur when boundary_mask == ~0UL.
> 
> base-commit: 5c850d31880e00f063fa2a3746ba212c4bcc510f
>