From: Hannes Reinecke Date: Tue, 9 Mar 2010 09:18:48 +0000 (+0100) Subject: [SCSI] scsi_transport_fc: Protect against overflow in dev_loss_tmo X-Git-Tag: v2.6.35-rc1~470^2^2~177 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=36dd288f0f930c154ec6a4d73a6a35f3079418c6;p=profile%2Fivi%2Fkernel-x86-ivi.git [SCSI] scsi_transport_fc: Protect against overflow in dev_loss_tmo The rport structure defines dev_loss_tmo as u32, which is later multiplied with HZ to get the actual timeout value. This might overflow for large dev_loss_tmo values. So we should be better using u64 as intermediate variables here to protect against overflow. Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke Acked-by: James Smart Signed-off-by: James Bottomley --- diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c index 6cfffc8..55fe730 100644 --- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c +++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_transport_fc.c @@ -834,7 +834,7 @@ static ssize_t store_fc_rport_dev_loss_tmo(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, const char *buf, size_t count) { - int val; + unsigned long val; struct fc_rport *rport = transport_class_to_rport(dev); struct Scsi_Host *shost = rport_to_shost(rport); struct fc_internal *i = to_fc_internal(shost->transportt); @@ -848,6 +848,12 @@ store_fc_rport_dev_loss_tmo(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, return -EINVAL; /* + * Check for overflow; dev_loss_tmo is u32 + */ + if (val > UINT_MAX) + return -EINVAL; + + /* * If fast_io_fail is off we have to cap * dev_loss_tmo at SCSI_DEVICE_BLOCK_MAX_TIMEOUT */ @@ -2865,7 +2871,7 @@ void fc_remote_port_delete(struct fc_rport *rport) { struct Scsi_Host *shost = rport_to_shost(rport); - int timeout = rport->dev_loss_tmo; + unsigned long timeout = rport->dev_loss_tmo; unsigned long flags; /*