linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] pinctrl: ocelot: Fix pincfg for lan966x

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: <20220711202150.7yoxazefe3zzlzpw@soft-dev3-1.localhost>
Date:   Mon, 11 Jul 2022 22:21:50 +0200
From:   Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        <kavyasree.kotagiri@...rochip.com>,
        "Alexandre Belloni" <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Colin Foster <colin.foster@...advantage.com>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@...tlin.com>,
        Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] pinctrl: ocelot: Fix pincfg for lan966x

The 07/11/2022 21:47, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> 
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 9:17 PM Horatiu Vultur
> <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com> wrote:
> >
> > The blamed commit introduce support for lan966x which use the same
> > pinconf_ops as sparx5. The problem is that pinconf_ops is specific to
> > sparx5. More precisely the offset of the bits in the pincfg register are
> > different and also lan966x doesn't have support for
> > PIN_CONFIG_INPUT_SCHMITT_ENABLE.
> >
> > Fix this by making pinconf_ops more generic such that it can be also
> > used by lan966x. This is done by introducing 'ocelot_pincfg_data' which
> > contains the offset and what is supported for each SOC.
> 
> 
> ...
> 
> > +       info->pincfg_data = devm_kmemdup(dev, &data->pincfg_data,
> > +                                        sizeof(struct ocelot_match_data),
> 
> sizeof(*info->pincfg_data)
> (isn't it a bug here?)

Yes it looks like it is. I think underneath it still allocates a page so
that could be the reason why I haven't see any crashes when I have tried
it.
I will fix this in the next version.

> 
> > +                                        GFP_KERNEL);
> 
> and missed the NULL check.
> 
> --
> With Best Regards,
> Andy Shevchenko

-- 
/Horatiu