[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6fb7c4f35f634fb2a0d1afa8818dbf6e@realtek.com>
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 04:38:33 +0000
From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
To: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>,
Zhang Shurong <zhang_shurong@...mail.com>,
"tony0620emma@...il.com" <tony0620emma@...il.com>
CC: "kvalo@...nel.org" <kvalo@...nel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org" <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] wifi: rtw88: fix incorrect error codes in rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 12:29 PM
> To: Zhang Shurong <zhang_shurong@...mail.com>; tony0620emma@...il.com
> Cc: kvalo@...nel.org; davem@...emloft.net; edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org; pabeni@...hat.com;
> linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 1/2] wifi: rtw88: fix incorrect error codes in rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Zhang Shurong <zhang_shurong@...mail.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2023 12:24 AM
> > To: tony0620emma@...il.com
> > Cc: kvalo@...nel.org; davem@...emloft.net; edumazet@...gle.com; kuba@...nel.org; pabeni@...hat.com;
> > linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; Zhang Shurong
> > <zhang_shurong@...mail.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] wifi: rtw88: fix incorrect error codes in rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user
> >
> > If there is a failure during copy_from_user, rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user
> > should return negative error code instead of a positive value count.
> >
> > Fix this bug by returning correct error code. Moreover, the check
> > of buffer against null is removed since it will be handled by
> > copy_from_user.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Zhang Shurong <zhang_shurong@...mail.com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@...ltek.com>
I would take back this temporarily because of below.
>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/debug.c | 4 ++--
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/debug.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/debug.c
> > index fa3d73b333ba..3da477e1ebd3 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/debug.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw88/debug.c
> > @@ -183,8 +183,8 @@ static int rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user(char tmp[], int size,
> >
> > tmp_len = (count > size - 1 ? size - 1 : count);
> >
> > - if (!buffer || copy_from_user(tmp, buffer, tmp_len))
> > - return count;
> > + if (copy_from_user(tmp, buffer, tmp_len))
> > + return -EFAULT;
> >
> > tmp[tmp_len] = '\0';
> >
In the second patch, you check 'ret < 0' instead of 'ret'. That looks like
you can possibly return positive value (e.g. count), but actually only
return 0 or - EFAULT after this patch. So, I would like change first or second
patch to make them intuitive.
return 0 or -EFAULT --> check by if (ret)
return 0 or -EFAULT or count --> check by if (ret < 0)
+ ret = rtw_debugfs_copy_from_user(tmp, sizeof(tmp), buffer, count, 2);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists