linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: dwc3: ep0: Fix mem corruption on OUT transfers of more than 512 bytes

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]

Message-ID: <557710CE.5050304@ti.com>
Date:	Tue, 9 Jun 2015 21:44:06 +0530
From:	Kishon Vijay Abraham I <kishon@...com>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
CC:	Michael Trimarchi <michael@...rulasolutions.com>,
	Felipe Balbi <balbi@...com>, <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	<linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>, <nsekhar@...com>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] usb: dwc3: ep0: Fix mem corruption on OUT transfers
 of more than 512 bytes

Hi,

On Tuesday 09 June 2015 08:46 PM, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2015, Kishon Vijay Abraham I wrote:
>
>>> Why not just make the bounce buffer size the same as the maxpacket
>>> size?  In other words, 1024 bytes instead of 512, for ep0 on a USB-3
>>> device.
>>
>> It would still be possible for the host to send data more than 1024 bytes no?
>
> Yes.
>
>> When working with DFU gadget, I've seen host sends data upto 4KB. Changing the
>> bounce buffer size might not be able to fix all the cases IMO. The actual fix
>> will be something like [1]
>>
>> [1] -> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1883688
>
> But with a bounce buffer that's only 512 bytes long, you can never send
> an entire packet's worth of data.  If the bounce buffer is 1024 bytes

for control endpoint, 512 bytes should be sufficient to send entire packet right?
> then you can send the entire first packet.  When that's done, you can
> send the second packet.  And so on.  It wouldn't be quite as fast, but
> for ep0 that shouldn't matter.

right! this is a variant of what I tried to implement in chained TRB [1]. 
$subject tries just to avoid memory corruption instead of actually trying to 
receive all the data.

Thanks
Kishon
--
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/