linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] pga: dfl: pci: Make sure DMA related error check is not done twice

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:   Fri, 25 Feb 2022 23:52:08 +0800
From:   Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>
To:     Yusuf Khan <yusisamerican@...il.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fpga@...r.kernel.org,
        mdf@...nel.org, trix@...hat.com, hao.wu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] pga: dfl: pci: Make sure DMA related error check
 is  not done twice

On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 08:39:48PM -0800, Yusuf Khan wrote:
> Note: This bug was introduced here:
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git/patch/?id=ada3caabaf6135150077c3f729bb06e8f3b5b8f6
> I saw this commit inside the linux-next branch, it is not present in
> the mainline branch.
> The linux-next branch was last updated 5 days ago, so I am unsure
> about the state of that commit.
> 
> On Mon, Feb 21, 2022 at 8:27 PM Yusuf Khan <yusisamerican@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > In the case that the DMA 64 bit bit mask error check does not fail,
> > the error check will be done twice, this patch fixed that.
> >
> > NOTE: This patch is only for use in the linux-next branch as the
> > commit that caused this bug happened there.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yusuf Khan <yusisamerican@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/fpga/dfl-pci.c | 9 +++++----
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/fpga/dfl-pci.c b/drivers/fpga/dfl-pci.c
> > index 717ac9715970..6222f18aed4b 100644
> > --- a/drivers/fpga/dfl-pci.c
> > +++ b/drivers/fpga/dfl-pci.c
> > @@ -356,11 +356,12 @@ int cci_pci_probe(struct pci_dev *pcidev, const struct pci_device_id *pcidevid)
> >         pci_set_master(pcidev);
> >
> >         ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pcidev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(64));
> > -       if (ret)
> > -               ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pcidev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> >         if (ret) {
> > -               dev_err(&pcidev->dev, "No suitable DMA support available.\n");
> > -               goto disable_error_report_exit;
> > +               ret = dma_set_mask_and_coherent(&pcidev->dev, DMA_BIT_MASK(32));
> > +               if (ret) {
> > +                       dev_err(&pcidev->dev, "No suitable DMA support available.\n");
> > +                       goto disable_error_report_exit;
> > +               }

Looks good to me.

Acked-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@...el.com>

> >         }
> >
> >         ret = cci_init_drvdata(pcidev);
> > --
> > 2.25.1
> >