Commit c243e963 authored by Dan Carpenter's avatar Dan Carpenter Committed by Jeff Kirsher

i40e: potential array underflow in i40e_vc_process_vf_msg()

If "vf_id" is smaller than hw->func_caps.vf_base_id then it leads to
an array underflow of the pf->vf[] array.  This is unlikely to happen
unless the hardware is bad, but it's a small change and it silences a
static checker warning.

Fixes: 7efa84b7 ('i40e: support VFs on PFs other than 0')
Signed-off-by: default avatarDan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
Tested-by: default avatarSibai Li <sibai.li@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarJeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
parent ff40dd5d
...@@ -1774,7 +1774,7 @@ int i40e_vc_process_vf_msg(struct i40e_pf *pf, u16 vf_id, u32 v_opcode, ...@@ -1774,7 +1774,7 @@ int i40e_vc_process_vf_msg(struct i40e_pf *pf, u16 vf_id, u32 v_opcode,
u32 v_retval, u8 *msg, u16 msglen) u32 v_retval, u8 *msg, u16 msglen)
{ {
struct i40e_hw *hw = &pf->hw; struct i40e_hw *hw = &pf->hw;
int local_vf_id = vf_id - hw->func_caps.vf_base_id; unsigned int local_vf_id = vf_id - hw->func_caps.vf_base_id;
struct i40e_vf *vf; struct i40e_vf *vf;
int ret; int ret;
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment