linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH] i2c: xlp9xx: Fix case where SSIF read transaction completes early

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 3 Aug 2018 10:19:40 +0530
From:   George Cherian <gcherian@...iumnetworks.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        George Cherian <george.cherian@...ium.com>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        jglauber@...ium.com
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] i2c: xlp9xx: Fix case where SSIF read transaction
 completes early

Hi Wolfran,

Thanks for the review.

I will update the patch with a small comment section above
len --;
so that there is no confusion.

On 08/01/2018 02:35 AM, Wolfram Sang wrote:
>> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xlp9xx.c
>> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xlp9xx.c
>> @@ -191,28 +191,30 @@ static void xlp9xx_i2c_drain_rx_fifo(struct xlp9xx_i2c_dev *priv)
>>   	if (priv->len_recv) {
>>   		/* read length byte */
>>   		rlen = xlp9xx_read_i2c_reg(priv, XLP9XX_I2C_MRXFIFO);
>> +		len--;
> 
> I don't know the HW and assume the above line is correct because of
> merging two interrupts into one. However, the line looks a bit stray,
> and I wonder if we shouldn't add a comment somewhere explaining the
> situation similar to the second paragraph of the commit message?
> 

Regards,
-George