linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] pinctrl/samsung: Correct EINTG banks order

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: <CAJKOXPdckxVfwU60=e7e6trbiB78ETE=G2vuY1kCrcKHaU2CzA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 10 Apr 2018 09:06:26 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To:     Paweł Chmiel <pawel.mikolaj.chmiel@...il.com>
Cc:     Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
        Sylwester Nawrocki <s.nawrocki@...sung.com>,
        linus.walleij@...aro.org, kgene@...nel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org, linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl/samsung: Correct EINTG banks order

On Sun, Apr 8, 2018 at 8:07 PM, Paweł Chmiel
<pawel.mikolaj.chmiel@...il.com> wrote:
> All banks with GPIO interrupts should be at beginning
> of bank array and without any other types of banks between them.
> This order is expected by exynos_eint_gpio_irq, when doing
> interrupt group to bank translation.
> Otherwise, kernel NULL pointer dereference would happen
> when trying to handle interrupt, due to wrong bank being looked up.
> Observed on s5pv210, when trying to handle gpj0 interrupt,
> where kernel was mapping it to gpi bank.

Thanks for the patch. The issue looks real although one thing was
missed - there is a gap in SVC group between GPK2 and GPL0 (pointed by
Marek Szyprowski):

0x0 - EINT_23 - gpk0
0x1 - EINT_24 - gpk1
0x2 - EINT_25 - gpk2
0x4 - EINT_27 - gpl0
0x7 - EINT_8 - gpm0

Maybe this should be done differently - to remove such hidden
requirement entirely in favor of another parameter of
EXYNOS_PIN_BANK_EINTG argument? Anyway if such hidden requirement
stays, then please document it in the source code (it maybe next to
PIN order... or next macro... or also in exynos_eint_gpio_irq()).

Beside that please add cc-stable and appropriate fixes tag,

Best regards,
Krzysztof