linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 18/23] platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: check `msg->result` in getting cmd mask

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:   Wed, 8 Jun 2022 09:23:23 -0700
From:   Guenter Roeck <groeck@...gle.com>
To:     Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>
Cc:     Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        "open list:CHROME HARDWARE PLATFORM SUPPORT" 
        <chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 18/23] platform/chrome: cros_ec_proto: check
 `msg->result` in getting cmd mask

On Wed, Jun 8, 2022 at 4:08 AM Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> cros_ec_get_host_command_version_mask() should check if EC wasn't happy
> by checking `msg->result`.
>
> Use cros_ec_map_error() and return the error code if any.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@...nel.org>
> ---
> No v2.  New and separated from the original series.
>
>  drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c | 21 +++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> index 06bc7db1213e..6a5771361383 100644
> --- a/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> +++ b/drivers/platform/chrome/cros_ec_proto.c
> @@ -428,13 +428,12 @@ static int cros_ec_get_proto_info_legacy(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev)
>   * the caller has ec_dev->lock mutex or the caller knows there is
>   * no other command in progress.
>   */
> -static int cros_ec_get_host_command_version_mask(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
> -       u16 cmd, u32 *mask)
> +static int cros_ec_get_host_command_version_mask(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev, u16 cmd, u32 *mask)
>  {
>         struct ec_params_get_cmd_versions *pver;
>         struct ec_response_get_cmd_versions *rver;
>         struct cros_ec_command *msg;
> -       int ret;
> +       int ret, mapped;
>
>         msg = kmalloc(sizeof(*msg) + max(sizeof(*rver), sizeof(*pver)),
>                       GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -450,14 +449,20 @@ static int cros_ec_get_host_command_version_mask(struct cros_ec_device *ec_dev,
>         pver->cmd = cmd;
>
>         ret = send_command(ec_dev, msg);
> -       if (ret > 0) {
> -               rver = (struct ec_response_get_cmd_versions *)msg->data;
> -               *mask = rver->version_mask;
> -               ret = 0;
> +       if (ret < 0)
> +               goto exit;
> +
> +       mapped = cros_ec_map_error(msg->result);
> +       if (mapped) {
> +               ret = mapped;
> +               goto exit;
>         }
>
What if ret == 0 ? Is that valid ?

Thanks,
Guenter

> +       rver = (struct ec_response_get_cmd_versions *)msg->data;
> +       *mask = rver->version_mask;
> +       ret = 0;
> +exit:
>         kfree(msg);
> -
>         return ret;
>  }
>
> --
> 2.36.1.255.ge46751e96f-goog
>