| 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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 6 Oct 2019 10:49:05 -0500
From: Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>
To: Yegor Yefremov <yegorslists@...glemail.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 7:34 AM Yegor Yefremov
<yegorslists@...glemail.com> wrote:
>
> 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?
What we if add a check to make sure we deference it? I was thinking
something like:
diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.c
b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.c
index d9074303c88e..fb4781292d40 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/serial/serial_mctrl_gpio.c
@@ -66,6 +66,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mctrl_gpio_set);
struct gpio_desc *mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod(struct mctrl_gpios *gpios,
enum mctrl_gpio_idx gidx)
{
+ if (gpios == NULL)
+ return NULL;
+
return gpios->gpio[gidx];
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(mctrl_gpio_to_gpiod);
This should make my previous patch tolerate situations where gpios is
NULL. It also explictly looks for conditions where the gpios are
manually configured for RTS and/or CTS.
> >
> > 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:
>
I unwound my patch and applied your patch instead, but it is back to
having corrupt frames again.
> 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;
> }
>
I did not check the value of uart->gpios after this patch, but since
the flow control code isn't executing, I am guessing it's still not
NULL.
> serial8250_set_defaults(uart);
adam
Powered by blists - more mailing lists