linux-kernel - Re: Should xhci_irq() call usb_hc

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: <87fultill8.fsf@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Mon, 12 Dec 2016 10:43:31 +0200
From:   Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...el.com>
Cc:     Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Should xhci_irq() call usb_hc_died()?


Hi,

Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> writes:
> Hi Mathias,
>
> ehci_irq(), ohci_irq(), fotg210_irq(), and oxu210_hcd_irq() contain code
> equivalent to this:
>
>   status = ehci_readl(...);
>   if (status == ~(u32) 0) {
>     ...
>     usb_hc_died(hcd);
>     ...
>     return IRQ_HANDLED;
>   }
>
> xhci_irq() has a similar check, but does not call usb_hc_died():
>
>   status = readl(...);
>   if (status = 0xffffffff) {
>     ...
>     return IRQ_HANDLED;
>   }
>
> Should xhci_irq() also call usb_hc_died()?  Maybe there's some reason
> for it to be different than the others, but it wasn't obvious to this
> casual observer :)

you might just have fixed several bugs in dealing with a dead HC :-)

Can you provide a patch? (well, unless Mathias has a strong reason not
to call usb_hc_died(), of course).

-- 
balbi

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (833 bytes)