linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] bluetooth: raise HCI_CMD

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 15 May 2014 16:50:58 +0200
From:	Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>
To:	Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>
CC:	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org" <linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] bluetooth: raise HCI_CMD_TIMEOUT from 2s to 8s

Am 15.05.2014 14:54, schrieb Luiz Augusto von Dentz:
> Hi Alexander,
> 
> On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:00 PM, Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de> wrote:
>> The reasoning to do this is the following:
>>
>> - If a timeout occurs, the HCI-communication is broken afterwards and the
>>   dongle isn't usable anymore.
>> - If it works after e.g. waiting 4s everyone is still happy but if it
>>   just breaks after only waiting 2s nothing is gained.
>> - Having to wait some more seconds until an error occurs doesn't change
>>   anything.
>>
>> So there is no disadvantage in rasing the timeout but a great advantage
>> in case the dongle needs more than 2s to process an HCI command.
>> E.g. I had sometimes HCI command timeouts at boot (but never after the BT stack
>> was successfull started). I assume the reason might be the USB-probing which
>> happend before through the bootloader, which might have confused the dongle
>> such that it needs a bit more time, but I'm not sure.
>>
>> Together with the patch which limits the timeout only to the actual time the
>> dongle needs to process an HCI command (and doesn't include the time the
>> kernel needs to process the answer to an HCI command), my problems were gone.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexander Holler <holler@...oftware.de>
>> ---
>>  include/net/bluetooth/hci.h | 2 +-
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h b/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
>> index be150cf..d50fd34 100644
>> --- a/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
>> +++ b/include/net/bluetooth/hci.h
>> @@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ enum {
>>  #define HCI_DISCONN_TIMEOUT    msecs_to_jiffies(2000)  /* 2 seconds */
>>  #define HCI_PAIRING_TIMEOUT    msecs_to_jiffies(60000) /* 60 seconds */
>>  #define HCI_INIT_TIMEOUT       msecs_to_jiffies(10000) /* 10 seconds */
>> -#define HCI_CMD_TIMEOUT                msecs_to_jiffies(2000)  /* 2 seconds */
>> +#define HCI_CMD_TIMEOUT                msecs_to_jiffies(8000)  /* 8 seconds */
>>  #define HCI_ACL_TX_TIMEOUT     msecs_to_jiffies(45000) /* 45 seconds */
>>  #define HCI_AUTO_OFF_TIMEOUT   msecs_to_jiffies(2000)  /* 2 seconds */
>>  #define HCI_POWER_OFF_TIMEOUT  msecs_to_jiffies(5000)  /* 5 seconds */
>> --
>> 1.8.3.1
> 
> This timeout seems arbitrary so I suppose we can increase it if we
> feel it is necessary but we used already different timeout for
> different commands like HCI_POWER_OFF_TIMEOUT, so perhaps if we can
> identify which command is more likely to timeout.
> 
> We could perhaps auto reset if a command timeout if there is really no
> other way to recover.

It is arbitrary but 2s is not enough here. And as I've written in the
description, there is absolutely no reason to keep this timeout
unnecessarily short. No one cares if an error message appears after 2s
or 8s if the communication with the dongle is in both cases broken
afterwards.

One of the commands I experieced the problem with was e.g.
HCI_OP_DELETE_STORED_LINK_KEY or HCI_OP_WRITE_SSP_MODE.

Regards,

Alexander Holler
--
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/