linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't remove the request if bus-expired

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: <678F3D1BB717D949B966B68EAEB446ED24E49C55@dggemm526-mbx.china.huawei.com>
Date:   Mon, 21 Jan 2019 01:49:07 +0000
From:   "Zengtao (B)" <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>
To:     Felipe Balbi <felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com>
CC:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't remove the request if
 bus-expired

Hi balbi:

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:felipe.balbi@...ux.intel.com]
>Sent: Monday, January 14, 2019 4:13 PM
>To: Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>
>Cc: Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>; Greg Kroah-Hartman
><gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>; linux-usb@...r.kernel.org;
>linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
>Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: dwc3: gadget: don't remove the request if
>bus-expired
>
>* PGP Signed by an unknown key
>
>
>Hi,
>
>Zeng Tao <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com> writes:
>> We have already returned EAGAIN for bus-expiry, and it's designed to
>> start with a future Frame number and start the transfer again. So we
>> should not remove the request for that case.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Zeng Tao <prime.zeng@...ilicon.com>
>
>Do we need a Fixes tag here? How about Cc stable? Can you share
>tracepoints exposing the problem?
>

I am not sure that we need to Fixes tag, it's not related to any single patch, but
there is definitely something wrong, after rethinking it again, I found that there
are still some problems for this patch, for the reties inside the driver, we should not
remove the request, but if we return -EAGAIN to the gadget layer, we should because
the gadget will requeue the request again if we return -EAGAIN.

Any suggestions. 

>
>thanks
>
>--
>balbi
>
>* Unknown Key
>* 0xE11A9906