linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 1/2] net: stmmac: Premature loop termination check was ignored

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: <ZBCIM//XkpFkiC4W@nimitz>
Date:   Tue, 14 Mar 2023 15:44:03 +0100
From:   Piotr Raczynski <piotr.raczynski@...el.com>
To:     Jochen Henneberg <jh@...neberg-systemdesign.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        "Ong Boon Leong" <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] net: stmmac: Premature loop termination check
 was ignored

On Tue, Mar 14, 2023 at 01:37:58PM +0100, Jochen Henneberg wrote:
> The premature loop termination check makes sense only in case of the
> jump to read_again where the count may have been updated. But
> read_again did not include the check.

Your commit titles and messages seems identical in both patches, someone
may get confused, maybe you could change commit titles at least?

Or since those are very related one liner fixes, maybe combine them into
one?

Also a question, since you in generally goto backwards here, is it guarded from
an infinite loop (during some corner case scenario maybe)?

Other than that looks fine, thanks.
Reviewed-by: Piotr Raczynski <piotr.raczynski@...el.com>

> 
> Fixes: ec222003bd94 ("net: stmmac: Prepare to add Split Header support")
> Signed-off-by: Jochen Henneberg <jh@...neberg-systemdesign.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> index e4902a7bb61e..ea51c7c93101 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
> @@ -5221,10 +5221,10 @@ static int stmmac_rx(struct stmmac_priv *priv, int limit, u32 queue)
>  			len = 0;
>  		}
>  
> +read_again:
>  		if (count >= limit)
>  			break;
>  
> -read_again:
>  		buf1_len = 0;
>  		buf2_len = 0;
>  		entry = next_entry;
> -- 
> 2.39.2
>