linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_uart: check for missing tty operations in protocol handlers

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:   Thu, 25 Jul 2019 16:31:31 +0200
From:   Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:     Vladis Dronov <vdronov@...hat.com>
Cc:     Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Suraj Sumangala <suraj@...eros.com>,
        Frederic Danis <frederic.danis@...ux.intel.com>,
        Loic Poulain <loic.poulain@...el.com>,
        Balakrishna Godavarthi <bgodavar@...eaurora.org>,
        syzkaller@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: hci_uart: check for missing tty operations in
 protocol handlers

Hi Vladis,

>> why is this one hidden behind CONFIG_PM? The general baud rate changes are
>> independent of runtime power management support.
> 
> hci_bcm calls hci_uart_set_flow_control() only from functions hidden behind
> #ifdef-CONFIG_PM (surely this can change in the future), and so without
> CONFIG_PM set it cannot hit the bug (as of now). So I've hidden the check
> for tiocm[gs]et() behind #ifdef-CONFIG_PM too.
> 
> If you tell me it is better to remove this #ifdef, I'll remove it.

just remove it since I think that is a coincidence actually. And I think you also need to add a check in hci_h5.c since that got Realtek support, it should also use flow control or baud rate settings.

>> And I would introduce a bool hci_uart_has_tiocm_support(struct hci_uart *)
>> helper.
> 
> Great, I will add it to the v2 fix. I guess a good place for it is hci_ldisc.c,
> near hci_uart_set_flow_control(), isn't it?

Sounds good.

Regards

Marcel