linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.17 106/220] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Use right chip in do_ppb

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: <20180701160912.814828524@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Sun,  1 Jul 2018 18:22:10 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...inera.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4.17 106/220] mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Use right chip in do_ppb_xxlock()

4.17-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...inera.com>

commit f93aa8c4de307069c270b2d81741961162bead6c upstream.

do_ppb_xxlock() fails to add chip->start when querying for lock status
(and chip_ready test), which caused false status reports.
Fix that by adding adr += chip->start and adjust call sites
accordingly.

Fixes: 1648eaaa1575 ("mtd: cfi_cmdset_0002: Support Persistent Protection Bits (PPB) locking")
Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...inera.com>
Signed-off-by: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c |    9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/chips/cfi_cmdset_0002.c
@@ -2533,8 +2533,9 @@ static int __maybe_unused do_ppb_xxlock(
 	unsigned long timeo;
 	int ret;
 
+	adr += chip->start;
 	mutex_lock(&chip->mutex);
-	ret = get_chip(map, chip, adr + chip->start, FL_LOCKING);
+	ret = get_chip(map, chip, adr, FL_LOCKING);
 	if (ret) {
 		mutex_unlock(&chip->mutex);
 		return ret;
@@ -2552,8 +2553,8 @@ static int __maybe_unused do_ppb_xxlock(
 
 	if (thunk == DO_XXLOCK_ONEBLOCK_LOCK) {
 		chip->state = FL_LOCKING;
-		map_write(map, CMD(0xA0), chip->start + adr);
-		map_write(map, CMD(0x00), chip->start + adr);
+		map_write(map, CMD(0xA0), adr);
+		map_write(map, CMD(0x00), adr);
 	} else if (thunk == DO_XXLOCK_ONEBLOCK_UNLOCK) {
 		/*
 		 * Unlocking of one specific sector is not supported, so we
@@ -2591,7 +2592,7 @@ static int __maybe_unused do_ppb_xxlock(
 	map_write(map, CMD(0x00), chip->start);
 
 	chip->state = FL_READY;
-	put_chip(map, chip, adr + chip->start);
+	put_chip(map, chip, adr);
 	mutex_unlock(&chip->mutex);
 
 	return ret;