linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] octeon_ep: Fix irq releasing in the error handling path of octep_request

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 08:28:59 +0300
From:   Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
To:     Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc:     Veerasenareddy Burru <vburru@...vell.com>,
        Abhijit Ayarekar <aayarekar@...vell.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Satananda Burla <sburla@...vell.com>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] octeon_ep: Fix irq releasing in the error handling
 path of octep_request_irqs()

On Sun, May 15, 2022 at 05:56:45PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> For the error handling to work as expected, the index in the
> 'oct->msix_entries' array must be tweaked because, when the irq are
> requested there is:
> 	msix_entry = &oct->msix_entries[i + num_non_ioq_msix];
> 
> So in the error handling path, 'i + num_non_ioq_msix' should be used
> instead of 'i'.
> 
> The 2nd argument of free_irq() also needs to be adjusted.
> 
> Fixes: 37d79d059606 ("octeon_ep: add Tx/Rx processing and interrupt support")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
> ---
> I think that the wording above is awful, but I'm sure you get it.
> Feel free to rephrase everything to have it more readable.
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_main.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_main.c
> index 6b60a03574a0..4dcae805422b 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/octeon_ep/octep_main.c
> @@ -257,10 +257,12 @@ static int octep_request_irqs(struct octep_device *oct)
>  
>  	return 0;
>  ioq_irq_err:
> +	i += num_non_ioq_msix;
>  	while (i > num_non_ioq_msix) {

This makes my mind hurt so badly.  Can we not just have two variables
for the two different loops instead of re-using i?

>  		--i;
>  		irq_set_affinity_hint(oct->msix_entries[i].vector, NULL);
> -		free_irq(oct->msix_entries[i].vector, oct->ioq_vector[i]);
> +		free_irq(oct->msix_entries[i].vector,
> +			 oct->ioq_vector[i - num_non_ioq_msix]);
>  	}

ioq_irq_err:
        while (--j >= 0) {
                ioq_vector = oct->ioq_vector[j];
                msix_entry = &oct->msix_entries[j + num_non_ioq_msix];

                irq_set_affinity_hint(msix_entry->vector, NULL);
                free_irq(msix_entry->vector, ioq_vector);
        }

regards,
dan carpenter