linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] serial: 8250_omap: Fix gpio check for auto RTS and CTS

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]

Date:   Sun, 6 Oct 2019 14:34:45 +0200
From:   Yegor Yefremov <yegorslists@...glemail.com>
To:     Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-serial@...r.kernel.org, Adam Ford <adam.ford@...icpd.com>,
        Linux-OMAP <linux-omap@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>, Vignesh R <vigneshr@...com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>,
        Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Nuno Gonçalves <nunojpg@...il.com>,
        Giulio Benetti <giulio.benetti@...ettiengineering.com>,
        Stefan Roese <sr@...x.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] serial: 8250_omap: Fix gpio check for auto RTS and CTS

On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 1:38 PM Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 6:21 AM Yegor Yefremov
> <yegorslists@...glemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Adam,
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 4:33 AM Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > There are two checks to see if the manual gpio is configured, but
> > > these the check is seeing if the structure is NULL instead it
> > > should check to see if there are CTS and/or RTS pins defined.
> > >
> > > This patch uses checks for those individual pins instead of
> > > checking for the structure itself.
> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
index e682390..d5fdb71 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
@@ -1031,6 +1031,8 @@ int serial8250_register_8250_port(struct
uart_8250_port *up)
                        } else {
                                uart->gpios = gpios;
                        }
+               } else {
+                       uart->gpios = NULL;
                }

                serial8250_set_defaults(uart);
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > > index c68e2b3a1634..836e736ae188 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_omap.c
> > > @@ -141,7 +141,7 @@ static void omap8250_set_mctrl(struct uart_port *port, unsigned int mctrl)
> > >
> > >         serial8250_do_set_mctrl(port, mctrl);
> > >
> > > -       if (!up->gpios) {
> > > +       if (!mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_RTS)) {
> > >                 /*
> > >                  * Turn off autoRTS if RTS is lowered and restore autoRTS
> > >                  * setting if RTS is raised
> > > @@ -456,7 +456,8 @@ static void omap_8250_set_termios(struct uart_port *port,
> > >         up->port.status &= ~(UPSTAT_AUTOCTS | UPSTAT_AUTORTS | UPSTAT_AUTOXOFF);
> > >
> > >         if (termios->c_cflag & CRTSCTS && up->port.flags & UPF_HARD_FLOW &&
> > > -           !up->gpios) {
> > > +           !mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_RTS) &&
> > > +           !mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(up->gpios, UART_GPIO_CTS)) {
> > >                 /* Enable AUTOCTS (autoRTS is enabled when RTS is raised) */
> > >                 up->port.status |= UPSTAT_AUTOCTS | UPSTAT_AUTORTS;
> > >                 priv->efr |= UART_EFR_CTS;
> >
> > Looks good to me but !up->gpios must remain as otherwise, we will get
> > NULL pointer dereference. What do you think?
>
> I was not seeing up->gpios ever NULL so the contents inside the check
> never was executed.  When I removed the check, the performance came
> back.  I looked at examples on how other devices checked for RTS and
> CTS, and I noticed that the Atmel serial driver did something like the
> above.
>
> >
> > Also adding some more people who can be interested in testing this approach.
>
> I am open for ideas.  If something is better, but something is either
> incorrectly setting up->gpios to non-NULL or the check for non-NULL is
> wrong.

I wonder whether we forgot to add this assignment for the ACPI systems:

diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
index e682390..d5fdb71 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/8250/8250_core.c
@@ -1031,6 +1031,8 @@ int serial8250_register_8250_port(struct
uart_8250_port *up)
                        } else {
                                uart->gpios = gpios;
                        }
+               } else {
+                       uart->gpios = NULL;
                }

                serial8250_set_defaults(uart);