linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] soundwire: cadence: Remove wasted space in response

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2022 10:19:19 +0000
From:   Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@...ux.intel.com>,
        <vkoul@...nel.org>
CC:     <yung-chuan.liao@...ux.intel.com>, <sanyog.r.kale@...el.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] soundwire: cadence: Remove wasted space in
 response_buf

On 01/12/2022 18:12, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> 
> 
> On 12/1/22 07:48, Richard Fitzgerald wrote:
>> The response_buf was declared much larger (128 entries) than the number
>> of responses that could ever be written into it (maximum 8).
> 
> Indeed I don't know why we used 128 entries. This is a magic value that
> doesn't appear in any specs I've looked at.
> 
> Note that there's 'sniffer' mode when each response takes two
> consecutive 32-words in the FIFO. we've never used this mode though so
> it's not really an issue.
> 
> It's also possible that this is related to the automatic command retry,
> where a failed command can be re-issued 15 times. However in that case
> the worst case would be 32 commands * 15 = 480. The value of 128 makes
> no sense at all, unless it was an upper bound for 8 * 15. We don't use
> this hardware retry btw.
> 
> See more below...
> 
>> Reduce response_buf to 8 entries and add checking in cdns_read_response()
>> to prevent overflowing reponse_buf if CDNS_MCP_RX_FIFO_AVAIL contains
>> an unexpectedly large number.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c | 6 ++++++
>>   drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h | 2 +-
>>   2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> index 27699f341f2c..95c84d9f0775 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c
>> @@ -774,8 +774,14 @@ static void cdns_read_response(struct sdw_cdns *cdns)
>>   	u32 num_resp, cmd_base;
>>   	int i;
>>   
>> +	BUILD_BUG_ON(ARRAY_SIZE(cdns->response_buf) < CDNS_MCP_CMD_LEN);
>> +
>>   	num_resp = cdns_readl(cdns, CDNS_MCP_FIFOSTAT);
>>   	num_resp &= CDNS_MCP_RX_FIFO_AVAIL;
>> +	if (num_resp > ARRAY_SIZE(cdns->response_buf)) {
>> +		dev_warn(cdns->dev, "RX AVAIL %d too long\n", num_resp);
>> +		num_resp = CDNS_MCP_CMD_LEN;
> 
> .... this is different from what the hardware documentation tells me.
> The range of values to RX_FIFO_AVAIL is 0..RX_FIFO_DEPTH + 2.
> 
> I don't understand the +2, but we should maybe be more cautious and use
> u32 response_buf[CDNS_MCP_CMD_LEN + 2];
> 

Probably we wouldn't know what to do with those extra 2 responses.
_cdns_xfer_msg() tells cdns_fill_msg_resp() to extract the same number
of responses as the original message length. So it would only extract 8
maximum. But anyway yes I can add the mysterious +2 into this.
Thinking about it, that's probably a good idea anyay for the next patch
that drains the RX FIFO after an error.

>> +	}
>>   
>>   	cmd_base = CDNS_MCP_CMD_BASE;
>>   
>> diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h
>> index 0434d70d4b1f..c2d817e8e22a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h
>> +++ b/drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.h
>> @@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ struct sdw_cdns {
>>   	struct sdw_bus bus;
>>   	unsigned int instance;
>>   
>> -	u32 response_buf[0x80];
>> +	u32 response_buf[8];
>>   	struct completion tx_complete;
>>   	struct sdw_defer *defer;
>>