linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8188eu: fix HighestRate check in odm_ARFBRefresh

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, 26 Sep 2019 12:17:30 -0500
From:   Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
To:     Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: rtl8188eu: fix HighestRate check in
 odm_ARFBRefresh_8188E()

On 9/26/19 2:31 AM, Denis Efremov wrote:
> It's incorrect to compare HighestRate with 0x0b twice in the following
> manner "if (HighestRate > 0x0b) ... else if (HighestRate > 0x0b) ...". The
> "else if" branch is constantly false. The second comparision should be
> with 0x03 according to the max_rate_idx in ODM_RAInfo_Init().
> 
> Cc: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Michael Straube <straube.linux@...il.com>
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Denis Efremov <efremov@...ux.com>
> ---
>   drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/hal8188e_rate_adaptive.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/hal8188e_rate_adaptive.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/hal8188e_rate_adaptive.c
> index 9ddd51685063..5792f491b59a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/hal8188e_rate_adaptive.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8188eu/hal/hal8188e_rate_adaptive.c
> @@ -409,7 +409,7 @@ static int odm_ARFBRefresh_8188E(struct odm_dm_struct *dm_odm, struct odm_ra_inf
>   		pRaInfo->PTModeSS = 3;
>   	else if (pRaInfo->HighestRate > 0x0b)
>   		pRaInfo->PTModeSS = 2;
> -	else if (pRaInfo->HighestRate > 0x0b)
> +	else if (pRaInfo->HighestRate > 0x03)
>   		pRaInfo->PTModeSS = 1;
>   	else
>   		pRaInfo->PTModeSS = 0;
> 

I agree that the original code is wrong; however, I prefer that changes that 
alter the execution should be tested. I see no evidence that such testing has 
been done. It probably does not matter because a highest rate between 3 and 0xb 
means 802.11g is in use, and that may no longer be a real-world situation.

With any future patches, you need to indicate if testing has been done.

Acked-by: Larry Finger <Larry.Finger@...inger.net>

Larry