linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ufs: core: Remove redundant wb check

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: <0a44763d-8c40-b9e7-6268-01567c401884@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 8 Dec 2022 13:22:15 +0100
From:   Bean Huo <huobean@...il.com>
To:     Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>,
        Arthur Simchaev <Arthur.Simchaev@....com>,
        martin.petersen@...cle.com
Cc:     beanhuo@...ron.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] ufs: core: Remove redundant wb check


On 08.12.22 12:31 AM, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> On 11/27/22 04:08, Arthur Simchaev wrote:
>> We used to use the extended-feature field in the device descriptor,
>> as an indication that the device supports ufs2.2 or later.
>> Remove that as this check is specifically done few lines above.
>>
>> Reviewed-by: Bean Huo <beanhuo@...ron.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Arthur Simchaev <Arthur.Simchaev@....com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 4 ----
>>   1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> index 2dbe249..2e47c69 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> @@ -7608,10 +7608,6 @@ static void ufshcd_wb_probe(struct ufs_hba 
>> *hba, const u8 *desc_buf)
>>            (hba->dev_quirks & 
>> UFS_DEVICE_QUIRK_SUPPORT_EXTENDED_FEATURES)))
>>           goto wb_disabled;
>>   -    if (hba->desc_size[QUERY_DESC_IDN_DEVICE] <
>> -        DEVICE_DESC_PARAM_EXT_UFS_FEATURE_SUP + 4)
>> -        goto wb_disabled;
>> -
>>       ext_ufs_feature = get_unaligned_be32(desc_buf +
>>                       DEVICE_DESC_PARAM_EXT_UFS_FEATURE_SUP);
>
> Does this code really have to be removed? I see a check of the
> UFS_DEVICE_QUIRK_SUPPORT_EXTENDED_FEATURES flag above the removed
> code but no check of the descriptor size?
>
it is not necessary to check this, but if you have concern, we could 
change to like this:


         if (desc_buf[DEVICE_DESC_PARAM_LEN] <
             DEVICE_DESC_PARAM_EXT_UFS_FEATURE_SUP + 4)
                 goto wb_disabled;

then   hba->desc_size could be removed.

Kind regards,

Bean