linux-kernel - Re: 2.6.24-rc2-mm1

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <473C8C97.9030707@panasas.com>
Date:	Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:14:47 +0200
From:	Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
To:	Gabriel C <nix.or.die@...glemail.com>, Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bk@...e.de, khali@...ux-fr.org,
	James <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
Subject: Re: 2.6.24-rc2-mm1

On Thu, Nov 15 2007 at 19:15 +0200, Matthew Dharm <mdharm-kernel@...-eyed-alien.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 10:23:09AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
>> Matthew Dharm wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2007 at 06:33:39AM +0100, Gabriel C wrote:
>>>> Matthew Dharm wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:49:24PM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
>>>>>> Matt, are these the errors you were worried about with the patch we were
>>>>>> just talking about tha tis in my tree?
>>>>> I can't tell from these logs.
>>>> There is the dmesg with CONFIG_USB_STORAGE_DEBUG :
>>>>
>>>> http://194.231.229.228/dmesg-2.6.24-rc2-mm1
>>> Good news: This isn't the bug Greg was worried about.
>>>
>>> Bad news: Something is seriously strange here.  Note the following from the
>>> logs:
>>>
>>> Nov 14 06:07:43 lara [   41.890614] usb-storage: Bulk Status S 0x53425355 T 0xd R 0 Stat 0x0
>>> Nov 14 06:07:43 lara [   41.890616] usb-storage: -- unexpectedly short transfer
>>>
>>> Note the 'R' value of zero -- this is the residue value.  It indicates a
>>> complete transfer, and that matches the log lines immediately previous
>>> which indicate a 4K transfer which completed properly.
>>>
>>> If residue is zero, then srb->resid should be zero.  Take a look in
>>> linux/usb/storage/transport.c in usb_stor_Bulk_transport()
>>>
>>> If srb->resid is zero, then you should NEVER get the "unexpectedly short
>>> transfer" message.  Look at usb_stor_invoke_transport() in the same file.
>> That code got replaced recently but I have no idea about it.
>>
>> ( http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/jejb/scsi-misc-2.6.git;a=shortlog  see the patches from Boaz Harrosh) 
>>
>> srb->resid got replaced by scsi_get_resid() it I see that right.
>>
>> I'm CC'ing the author , he will know I think.
> 
> The replacement looks, to my eye, to be logically correct.  The patch was
> pretty clean.
> 
> Then again, I haven't looked at what is "under the hood" of the accessor
> functions.  Perhaps there is a side-effect somewhere in there?
> 
> Perhaps a quick debugging test -- print the value of scsi_get_resid(srb)
> just after it's initialized to zero at the top of
> usb_stor_invoke_transport(), and then just after the call to
> us->transport().
> 

I have found the bug. My bad sorry about that. Patch below
It is because I switched from use of usb_stor_bulk_transfer_sg()
to usb_stor_bulk_transfer_sglist, but forgot the residual handling.

(Please send scsi bugs to scsi list. My lkml mental filters are
much higher, Sorry for not seeing this yesterday)

----
From: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 20:07:56 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] Fix bug in last usb accessor patch

>>> Bad news: Something is seriously strange here.  Note the following from the
>>> logs:
>>>
>>> Nov 14 06:07:43 lara [   41.890614] usb-storage: Bulk Status S 0x53425355 T 0xd R 0 Stat 0x0
>>> Nov 14 06:07:43 lara [   41.890616] usb-storage: -- unexpectedly short transfer
>>>
>>> Note the 'R' value of zero -- this is the residue value.  It indicates a
>>> complete transfer, and that matches the log lines immediately previous
>>> which indicate a 4K transfer which completed properly.
>>>
>>> If residue is zero, then srb->resid should be zero.  Take a look in
>>> linux/usb/storage/transport.c in usb_stor_Bulk_transport()
>>>
>>> If srb->resid is zero, then you should NEVER get the "unexpectedly short
>>> transfer" message.  Look at usb_stor_invoke_transport() in the same file.
>> That code got replaced recently but I have no idea about it.

  wrong resid handling fixed

Signed-off-by: Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>
---
 drivers/usb/storage/transport.c |    7 ++++---
 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
index d3a84a2..d9f4912 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/storage/transport.c
@@ -465,11 +465,12 @@ static int usb_stor_bulk_transfer_sglist(struct us_data *us, unsigned int pipe,
 int usb_stor_bulk_srb(struct us_data* us, unsigned int pipe,
 		      struct scsi_cmnd* srb)
 {
-	int resid = scsi_get_resid(srb);
+	unsigned int partial;
 	int result = usb_stor_bulk_transfer_sglist(us, pipe, scsi_sglist(srb),
 				      scsi_sg_count(srb), scsi_bufflen(srb),
-				      &resid);
-	scsi_set_resid(srb, resid);
+				      &partial);
+
+	scsi_set_resid(srb, scsi_bufflen(srb) - partial);
 	return result;
 }
 
-- 
1.5.3.1








-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/