Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Backport v3.3-branch] ipm: mcux and imx fixes #63175

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 7, 2023

Conversation

zephyrbot
Copy link
Collaborator

@zephyrbot zephyrbot commented Sep 27, 2023

Backport eeea26d~5..eeea26d from #63069.

Fixes #64335

Flavio Ceolin added 5 commits September 27, 2023 17:35
It is possible to happen a buffer overflow in ipm_send callback
due a wrong comparison between signed/unsigned types.

Signed-off-by: Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit 6654d18)
Since the driver is passing the whole buffer, let's zero it to avoid
pass garbage in case of size != buffer's size.

Signed-off-by: Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit 4ff32d9)
It is possible to happen a buffer overflow in ipm_send due the lack
of a checking for negative value.

Signed-off-by: Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit 0a12a05)
Since the driver is passing the whole buffer, let's zero it to avoid
pass garbage in case of size != buffer's size.

Signed-off-by: Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit 98857c2)
A buffer overflow happens in send() when size is negative because
it is promoted to signed when used in memcpy.

Signed-off-by: Flavio Ceolin <flavio.ceolin@intel.com>
(cherry picked from commit eeea26d)
@fabiobaltieri
Copy link
Member

@ceolin can you file an issue for the backport please?

@henrikbrixandersen
Copy link
Member

@ceolin can you file an issue for the backport please?

@ceolin Ping

@ceolin
Copy link
Member

ceolin commented Oct 24, 2023

@ceolin can you file an issue for the backport please?

@ceolin Ping

Done, quick question, can I use the same issue for all backport prs ?

@henrikbrixandersen
Copy link
Member

Done, quick question, can I use the same issue for all backport prs ?

Thanks! Yes, you can. If the original PR had an associated bug issue, we could have referenced that instead (even if it was closed already by merging the original PR).

@henrikbrixandersen
Copy link
Member

@dleach02, @ceolin: Please review.

@henrikbrixandersen
Copy link
Member

@dleach02 ping

@henrikbrixandersen henrikbrixandersen merged commit 9669393 into v3.3-branch Nov 7, 2023
26 checks passed
@nashif nashif deleted the backport-63069-to-v3.3-branch branch February 13, 2024 14:50
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area: IPM Inter-Processor Mailbox Backport Backport PR and backport failure issues platform: NXP NXP
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants