linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 05/18] lirc driver for i2c-based IR receivers

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]

Date:	Wed, 10 Sep 2008 09:42:53 -0600
From:	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To:	Jarod Wilson <jwilson@...hat.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Janne Grunau <j@...nua.net>,
	Christoph Bartelmus <lirc@...telmus.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/18] lirc driver for i2c-based IR receivers

> +config LIRC_I2C
> +	tristate "I2C Based IR Receivers"
> +	default n
> +	depends on LIRC_DEV
> +	help
> +	  Driver for I2C-based IR receivers, such as those commonly
> +	  found onboard Hauppauge PVR-150/250/350 video capture cards

This driver offers relatively few things to gripe about.  But I'm not one
to shrink from a challenge...

> +#include <linux/semaphore.h>

It looks like this driver is semaphore-free?  Actually, it looks kind of
lock-free in general.  That's probably my biggest concern; what is
protecting against concurrent operations on the device?

> +static int add_to_buf_pcf8574(void *data, struct lirc_buffer *buf)
> +{
> +	struct IR *ir = data;
> +	int rc;
> +	unsigned char all, mask;
> +	unsigned char key;
> +
> +	/* compute all valid bits (key code + pressed/release flag) */
> +	all = ir->bits | ir->flag;
> +
> +	/* save IR writable mask bits */
> +	mask = i2c_smbus_read_byte(&ir->c) & ~all;
> +
> +	/* send bit mask */
> +	rc = i2c_smbus_write_byte(&ir->c, (0xff & all) | mask);
> +
> +	/* receive scan code */
> +	rc = i2c_smbus_read_byte(&ir->c);
> +
> +	if (rc == -1) {
> +		dprintk("%s read error\n", ir->c.name);
> +		return -EIO;
> +	}

This ignores the return value from the first i2c_smbus_read_byte() and
i2c_smbus_write_byte() calls.  Beyond that, i2c_smbus_read_byte() can
return -EANYTHING, so I think the check should be "rc < 0", no?  Tests
against -1 are common in this driver, I'll not point them all out.

> +static int ir_attach(struct i2c_adapter *adap, int addr,
> +		     unsigned short flags, int kind)
> +{

...

> +	ir->l.minor = lirc_register_plugin(&ir->l);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

The lirc_register_plugin() call can fail, the result should be checked.

> +#ifdef MODULE
> +
> +int init_module(void)
> +{
> +	request_module("bttv");
> +	request_module("rivatv");
> +	request_module("ivtv");
> +	request_module("cx8800");
> +	i2c_add_driver(&driver);
> +	return 0;
> +}

Why are all these modules being loaded here?  That would seem like a job
for udev.

jon
--
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/