linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v8] i2c: virtio: add a virtio i2c frontend driver

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]

Message-ID: <20210319055322.lw4dhb2kwtrtd3qu@vireshk-i7>
Date:   Fri, 19 Mar 2021 11:23:22 +0530
From:   Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:     Jie Deng <jie.deng@...el.com>
Cc:     linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mst@...hat.com, wsa@...nel.org,
        jasowang@...hat.com, wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com,
        andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com, conghui.chen@...el.com,
        arnd@...db.de, kblaiech@...lanox.com,
        jarkko.nikula@...ux.intel.com, Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru,
        rppt@...nel.org, loic.poulain@...aro.org, tali.perry1@...il.com,
        u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, bjorn.andersson@...aro.org,
        yu1.wang@...el.com, shuo.a.liu@...el.com, stefanha@...hat.com,
        pbonzini@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8] i2c: virtio: add a virtio i2c frontend driver

On 16-03-21, 18:35, Jie Deng wrote:
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-virtio.c
> +static int virtio_i2c_send_reqs(struct virtqueue *vq,
> +				struct virtio_i2c_req *reqs,
> +				struct i2c_msg *msgs, int nr)
> +{
> +	struct scatterlist *sgs[3], out_hdr, msg_buf, in_hdr;
> +	int i, outcnt, incnt, err = 0;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
> +		if (!msgs[i].len)
> +			break;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Only 7-bit mode supported for this moment. For the address format,
> +		 * Please check the Virtio I2C Specification.
> +		 */
> +		reqs[i].out_hdr.addr = cpu_to_le16(msgs[i].addr << 1);
> +
> +		if (i != nr - 1)
> +			reqs[i].out_hdr.flags = cpu_to_le32(VIRTIO_I2C_FLAGS_FAIL_NEXT);
> +
> +		outcnt = incnt = 0;
> +		sg_init_one(&out_hdr, &reqs[i].out_hdr, sizeof(reqs[i].out_hdr));
> +		sgs[outcnt++] = &out_hdr;
> +
> +		reqs[i].buf = i2c_get_dma_safe_msg_buf(&msgs[i], 1);

You allocate a buffer here, lets see if they are freeing properly or not (I
remember that I gave same feedback earlier as well, but anyway).

> +		if (!reqs[i].buf)
> +			break;
> +
> +		sg_init_one(&msg_buf, reqs[i].buf, msgs[i].len);
> +
> +		if (msgs[i].flags & I2C_M_RD)
> +			sgs[outcnt + incnt++] = &msg_buf;
> +		else
> +			sgs[outcnt++] = &msg_buf;
> +
> +		sg_init_one(&in_hdr, &reqs[i].in_hdr, sizeof(reqs[i].in_hdr));
> +		sgs[outcnt + incnt++] = &in_hdr;
> +
> +		err = virtqueue_add_sgs(vq, sgs, outcnt, incnt, &reqs[i], GFP_KERNEL);
> +		if (err < 0) {
> +			pr_err("failed to add msg[%d] to virtqueue.\n", i);
> +			i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf(reqs[i].buf, &msgs[i], false);

On failure here, you freed the buffers for request "i" but not others..

> +			break;
> +		}
> +	}
> +
> +	return i;
> +}
> +
> +static int virtio_i2c_complete_reqs(struct virtqueue *vq,
> +					struct virtio_i2c_req *reqs,
> +					struct i2c_msg *msgs, int nr)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_i2c_req *req;
> +	unsigned int len;
> +	int i, j;
> +
> +	for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
> +		req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len);
> +		if (!(req && req == &reqs[i])) {
> +			pr_err("msg[%d]: addr=0x%x is out of order.\n", i, msgs[i].addr);
> +			break;

Since you break here, what will happen to the buffer ? I thought
virtqueue_get_buf() will return a req only once and then you can't access it ?

> +		}
> +
> +		if (req->in_hdr.status != VIRTIO_I2C_MSG_OK) {
> +			pr_err("msg[%d]: addr=0x%x backend error.\n", i, msgs[i].addr);
> +			break;
> +		}
> +
> +		i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf(req->buf, &msgs[i], true);
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Detach all the used buffers from the vq and
> +	 * Release unused DMA safe buffer if any.
> +	 */
> +	for (j = i; j < nr; j++) {
> +		req = virtqueue_get_buf(vq, &len);
> +		if (req)
> +			i2c_put_dma_safe_msg_buf(req->buf, &msgs[j], false);

This will come in play only if something failed in the earlier loop ? Or my
understanding incorrect ? Also this should be merged with the above for loop
itself, it is just doing part of it.

> +	}
> +
> +	return i;
> +}
> +
> +static int virtio_i2c_xfer(struct i2c_adapter *adap, struct i2c_msg *msgs, int num)
> +{
> +	struct virtio_i2c *vi = i2c_get_adapdata(adap);
> +	struct virtqueue *vq = vi->vq;
> +	struct virtio_i2c_req *reqs;
> +	unsigned long time_left;
> +	int ret, nr;
> +
> +	reqs = kcalloc(num, sizeof(*reqs), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (!reqs)
> +		return -ENOMEM;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&vi->lock);
> +
> +	ret = virtio_i2c_send_reqs(vq, reqs, msgs, num);
> +	if (ret == 0)
> +		goto err_unlock_free;
> +
> +	nr = ret;
> +	reinit_completion(&vi->completion);
> +	virtqueue_kick(vq);
> +
> +	time_left = wait_for_completion_timeout(&vi->completion, adap->timeout);
> +	if (!time_left) {

On error here, we will surely not free the buffers, isn't it ?

> +		dev_err(&adap->dev, "virtio i2c backend timeout.\n");
> +		ret = -ETIMEDOUT;
> +		goto err_unlock_free;
> +	}
> +
> +	ret = virtio_i2c_complete_reqs(vq, reqs, msgs, nr);
> +
> +err_unlock_free:
> +	mutex_unlock(&vi->lock);
> +	kfree(reqs);
> +	return ret;
> +}
-- 
viresh