linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] mfd: cros_ec: Use the proper size when looking at the cros_ec

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:	Wed, 2 Jul 2014 08:51:28 -0700
From:	Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:	Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
	Vincent Palatin <vpalatin@...omium.org>,
	Bill Richardson <wfrichar@...omium.org>,
	Randall Spangler <rspangler@...omium.org>,
	Simon Glass <sjg@...omium.org>,
	Andreas Färber <afaerber@...e.de>,
	Stephan van Schaik <stephan@...khronix.com>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>,
	Samuel Ortiz <sameo@...ux.intel.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mfd: cros_ec: Use the proper size when looking at the
 cros_ec_i2c result

Lee,

On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 12:23 AM, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2014, Doug Anderson wrote:
>
>> We know how many bytes the EC should be sending us (which is also the
>> number of bytes transferred) and also how many bytes the EC actually
>> wanted to send to us.  When computing the checksum and copying back
>> data let's make sure we take the lesser of the two of those.  We'll
>> also complain if the EC tried to send us too many bytes.  The EC
>> sending us too few bytes is legit for when we send the EC an invalid
>> command.
>>
>> This is based on similar code in cros_ec_spi.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
>> ---
>>  drivers/mfd/cros_ec_i2c.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> Acked-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
>
> Is this patch orthogonal i.e. can it be applied without the other two
> patches?

Yes.  If patch 3/3 had worked out then it would have required patch #1
for proper functioning and patch #2 (this patch) to avoid an ugly
error message in the log.  ...but patch #1 and this patch both can
stand on their own and can be applied.

-Doug
--
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/