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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 21 May 2016 20:47:33 +0200 From: Michal Nazarewicz <mina86@...a86.com> To: Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>, "Du, Changbin" <changbin.du@...el.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>, rui.silva@...aro.org, k.opasiak@...sung.com, lars@...afoo.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH 0/2] f_fs: better handle excess data on read Between this set and Du, Changbin’s patch, we now have implementation for the following three possibilities to choose from: 1. Buffer excess data (this whole patch set). 2. Fail the transfer (Du, Changbin’s patch). 3. Drop excess data (the first patch from this set). As per earlier comments, I think 3. is the correct, i.e. the second patch should not be ocmmited because: * it complicates the code, * doesn’t handle AIO anyway, * introduces weird behaviours when partial read happens just before endpoint is disabled (we may end up silently dropping excess data anyway), * goes beyond what UDC does and * breaks one read -> one request model which has been true so far. Michal Nazarewicz (2): usb: gadget: f_fs: printk error when excess data is dropped on read usb: gadget: f_fs: buffer data from ‘oversized’ OUT requests drivers/usb/gadget/function/f_fs.c | 179 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 145 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) -- Best regards ミハウ “𝓶𝓲𝓷𝓪86” ナザレヴイツ «If at first you don’t succeed, give up skydiving»
Powered by blists - more mailing lists