[PATCH v2] mtd: parsers: qcom: drop setting of partition's mask_flags

[sashiko-bot at kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] qcomsmempart: heap buffer overflow via SMEM TOCTOU
--

commit 9a30e6e744ea6a93af6069ce8afe6e5e1ff75040
Author: Gabor Juhos <j4g8y7 at gmail.com>

mtd: parsers: qcom: drop setting of partition's mask_flags

This commit removes the assignment of mask_flags from the smem_flash_pentry
structure's attr member in the Qualcomm SMEM partition parser. The MTD
layer does not define maskable flags in the lower 8 bits, and the field is
undocumented.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261006-qcom-smempart-ignore-mask_flags-v1-1-a48d9395b21b@gmail.com

> diff --git a/drivers/mtd/parsers/qcomsmempart.c b/drivers/mtd/parsers/qcomsmempart.c
> index 1591aea48b280..355efb2e4e40c 100644
> --- a/drivers/mtd/parsers/qcomsmempart.c
> +++ b/drivers/mtd/parsers/qcomsmempart.c
> @@ -144,7 +144,6 @@ static int parse_qcomsmem_part(struct mtd_info *mtd,
>  
>  		parts[j].name = name;
>  		parts[j].offset = (u64)le32_to_cpu(pentry->offset) * mtd->erasesize;
> -		parts[j].mask_flags = pentry->attr;
>  		parts[j].size = (u64)le32_to_cpu(pentry->length) * mtd->erasesize;

[Severity: High]
Could this loop overwrite the parts array out of bounds?

Since ptable is mapped in shared memory via qcom_smem_get(), the contents
could be modified by a remote coprocessor concurrently.

Earlier in parse_qcomsmem_part(), the code counts valid partitions:

	for (i = 0; i < tmpparts; i++) {
		pentry = &ptable->pentry[i];
		if (pentry->name[0] != '\0')
			numparts++;
	}

	parts = kzalloc_objs(*parts, numparts);

If a remote coprocessor changes pentry->name[0] from '\0' to a non-null
value between this first counting loop and the second population loop,
would the second loop find more valid entries than numparts?

This appears like it would cause the index j to increment past the allocated
size of parts, resulting in an out-of-bounds heap write.

Would it be safer to add an explicit bounds check against numparts before
assigning values to parts[j]?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261013-qcom-smempart-ignore-mask_flags-v2-1-01b7e133f273@gmail.com?part=1