[ Upstream commit
2b6207291b7b277a5df9d1aab44b56815a292dba ]
There is a comment here which says that DIV_ROUND_UP() and that's where
the problem comes from. Say you pick:
args->bpp = UINT_MAX - 7;
args->width = 4;
args->height = 1;
The integer overflow in DIV_ROUND_UP() means "cpp" is UINT_MAX / 8 and
because of how we picked args->width that means cpp < UINT_MAX / 4.
I've fixed it by preventing the integer overflow in DIV_ROUND_UP(). I
removed the check for !cpp because it's not possible after this change.
I also changed all the 0xffffffffU references to U32_MAX.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Link: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/msgid/20180516140026.GA19340@mwanda
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <alexander.levin@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
return -EINVAL;
/* overflow checks for 32bit size calculations */
- /* NOTE: DIV_ROUND_UP() can overflow */
+ if (args->bpp > U32_MAX - 8)
+ return -EINVAL;
cpp = DIV_ROUND_UP(args->bpp, 8);
- if (!cpp || cpp > 0xffffffffU / args->width)
+ if (cpp > U32_MAX / args->width)
return -EINVAL;
stride = cpp * args->width;
- if (args->height > 0xffffffffU / stride)
+ if (args->height > U32_MAX / stride)
return -EINVAL;
/* test for wrap-around */