linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ASoC: core: Pass kcontrol pointer to bytes tlv callbacks

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 12 Jun 2015 12:22:07 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Ben Zhang <benzh@...omium.org>
Cc:	Omair Mohammed Abdullah <omair.m.abdullah@...el.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>,
	Dylan Reid <dgreid@...omium.org>,
	alsa-devel <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: core: Pass kcontrol pointer to bytes tlv callbacks

On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 02:10:28PM -0700, Ben Zhang wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 4:59 AM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 03:24:03PM -0700, Ben Zhang wrote:

> >> -     int (*get)(unsigned int __user *bytes, unsigned int size);
> >> -     int (*put)(const unsigned int __user *bytes, unsigned int size);
> >> +     int (*get)(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol,
> >> +                unsigned int __user *bytes, unsigned int size);
> >> +     int (*put)(struct snd_kcontrol *kcontrol,
> >> +                const unsigned int __user *bytes, unsigned int size);

> > This doesn't update any users and we do have some like the Haswell PCM
> > driver.

> I couldn't find any existing users of the callbacks. It looks like the
> modified callbacks are used by SND_SOC_BYTES_TLV only, and there is no
> reference to SND_SOC_BYTES_TLV in the kernel.

> The Haswell PCM driver uses SND_SOC_BYTES_EXT which doesn't use the
> callbacks in struct soc_bytes_ext. The xhandler_get/put are assigned
> to snd_kcontrol_new.get/put instead.

This then begs the question why the fix isn't for the TLV version to use
the same callbacks we're currently using?  It's not obvious looking at
the definitions of the controls why we would want them to be using
separate ones and TLV would normally not affect the I/O.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)