linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Revert "ARM: cns3xxx: pci: avoid potential stack overflow"

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <11128570.JeBAgI5zQr@wuerfel>
Date:	Wed, 01 Jun 2016 23:09:47 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@...p.pl>
Cc:	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Revert "ARM: cns3xxx: pci: avoid potential stack overflow"

On Wednesday, June 1, 2016 1:08:59 PM CEST Krzysztof Hałasa wrote:
> Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com> writes:
> 
> > This reverts commit 498a92d42596a7a32c042319eb62a4c3d8081cf1.
> >
> > Krzysztof reported that this change broke Cavium CNS3xxx, ARMv6 (Laguna
> > GW-2388) because the MRRS setting is never written to the hardware.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>
> > CC: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > CC: Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@...p.pl>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm/mach-cns3xxx/pcie.c |   71 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
> >  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)
> 
> This, applied to v4.7-rc1, fixes the problem on my Laguna boards.
> 
> Tested-by: Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@...p.pl>
> 
> And as well
> 
> Acked-by: Krzysztof Hałasa <khalasa@...p.pl>

Thank!

Obviously, I'd rather not bring back the gcc warning or the potential
stack overflow (however unlikely).

What exactly is the problem we are seeing, and is there a way to fix
it on top of my patch? Are we perhaps just missing a call to
pcie_bus_configure_settings()?

Note that cns3xxx is in a bit of an odd state, as only half of the
platform code is even present in the kernel, and there is no effort
to change that. As far as I know, the board that this was tested on
is not present in the mainline kernel, and the board we support
is a development system that few people even own at this point.

	Arnd