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 <[email protected]>
---
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.
