linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: Fix a signedness bug in tcpm_fw_get

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:   Tue, 1 Oct 2019 06:40:43 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usb: typec: tcpm: Fix a signedness bug in
 tcpm_fw_get_caps()

On 10/1/19 4:54 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 05:53:10AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 02:02:19PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> The "port->typec_caps.data" and "port->typec_caps.type" variables are
>>> enums and in this context GCC will treat them as an unsigned int so they
>>> can never be less than zero.
>>>
>>> Fixes: ae8a2ca8a221 ("usb: typec: Group all TCPCI/TCPM code together")
>>> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
>>> ---
>>>   drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c | 4 ++--
>>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
>>> index 96562744101c..d3b63e000ae2 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/usb/typec/tcpm/tcpm.c
>>> @@ -4410,7 +4410,7 @@ static int tcpm_fw_get_caps(struct tcpm_port *port,
>>>   	ret = fwnode_property_read_string(fwnode, "data-role", &cap_str);
>>>   	if (ret == 0) {
>>>   		port->typec_caps.data = typec_find_port_data_role(cap_str);
>>> -		if (port->typec_caps.data < 0)
>>> +		if ((int)port->typec_caps.data < 0)
>>>   			return -EINVAL;
>>
>> Doesn't that also cause a warning about overwriting error return codes ?
> 
> I'm happy that you think there is a tool which generates warnings like
> that but it's just people manually complaining.  :P
> 

I am quite sure there is, or at least used to be - I have seen such warnings.
Maybe it was removed.

Guenter