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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2016 11:38:20 -0700 From: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> To: Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>, Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>, Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>, Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>, Enric Balletbo <enric.balletbo@...labora.co.uk>, Shawn Nematbakhsh <shawnn@...omium.org>, Gwendal Grignou <gwendal@...omium.org>, Tomeu Vizoso <tomeu.vizoso@...labora.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-input@...r.kernel.org, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] i2c: cros-ec-tunnel: Fix usage of cros_ec_cmd_xfer() Hi Thierry, On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 11:14:33AM +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 01:48:25PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 10:43:13PM +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > On Mon, Jul 25, 2016 at 11:14:10AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote: > > > > cros_ec_cmd_xfer returns success status if the command transport > > > > completes successfully, but the execution result is incorrectly ignored. > > > > In many cases, the execution result is assumed to be successful, leading > > > > to ignored errors and operating on uninitialized data. > > > > > > > > We've recently introduced the cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() helper to avoid these > > > > problems. Let's use it. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org> > > > > > > I agree with Dmitry about Thierry pushing the patch. So: > > > > > > Acked-by: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> > > > > Fine with me, as long as Thierry is up for it. > > > > BTW, I think the dependency is on target for v4.8-rc1, so if Thierry > > misses this, then you should be able to apply this yourself after the > > merge window. > > Why the rush? The behaviour of the cros_ec_cmd_xfer() function has not > changed in at least a year, so this can't be very urgent. I merged the > original patch because it is a dependency for another patch, but given > the above I think it's fine if we wait until after v4.8-rc1 and let > subsystem maintainers pick them up individually. I wasn't personally suggesting it was a rush -- actually, the contrary. I was just informing Wolfram and Dmitry that the dependency only was relevant *if* they were rushing to have the patches applied. Regarding timeline: some form of this patch was authored and submitted to our downstream tree over a year ago. I just happened to notice recently, now that the ..._status() helper is going upstream. > On another note, the commit message makes it sound like this might fix > potential bugs. Since it's been like that for a couple of releases, do > we need to Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org? It does potentially fix bugs. I suspect those bugs would probably occur mostly in cases of poorly-configured software (e.g., using the wrong EC protocol) or prototype hardware, but it's certainly possible this could head off in-the-field bugs. Perhaps Gwendal or Shawn could elaborate. At any rate, if you Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org, you'll want to include the dependency in the commit message. I think the format is something like this: Fixes: SHA ("i2c: wherever this driver was introduced") Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # 9798ac6d32c1 mfd: cros_ec: Add cros_ec_cmd_xfer_status() helper Regards, Brian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists