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]
Date:   Tue, 6 Jun 2023 21:24:53 +0200
From:   Andi Shyti <andi.shyti@...nel.org>
To:     Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@...ian.com>
Cc:     Michal Simek <michal.simek@....com>,
        Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@...inx.com>,
        Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, Marek Vasut <marex@...x.de>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] i2c: xiic: Don't try to handle more interrupt events
 after error

Hi Robert,

On Tue, Jun 06, 2023 at 12:25:58PM -0600, Robert Hancock wrote:
> In xiic_process, it is possible that error events such as arbitration
> lost or TX error can be raised in conjunction with other interrupt flags
> such as TX FIFO empty or bus not busy. Error events result in the
> controller being reset and the error returned to the calling request,
> but the function could potentially try to keep handling the other
> events, such as by writing more messages into the TX FIFO. Since the
> transaction has already failed, this is not helpful and will just cause
> issues.

what kind of issues?

> This problem has been present ever since:
> 
> commit 7f9906bd7f72 ("i2c: xiic: Service all interrupts in isr")
> 
> which allowed non-error events to be handled after errors, but became
> more obvious after:
> 
> commit 743e227a8959 ("i2c: xiic: Defer xiic_wakeup() and
> __xiic_start_xfer() in xiic_process()")
> 
> which reworked the code to add a WARN_ON which triggers if both the
> xfer_more and wakeup_req flags were set, since this combination is
> not supposed to happen, but was occurring in this scenario.
> 
> Skip further interrupt handling after error flags are detected to avoid
> this problem.
> 
> Fixes: 7f9906bd7f72 ("i2c: xiic: Service all interrupts in isr")
> Signed-off-by: Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@...ian.com>

please add:

Cc: <stable@...r.kernel.org> # v4.3+

> ---
>  drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xiic.c | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xiic.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xiic.c
> index 8a3d9817cb41..ee6edc963dea 100644
> --- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xiic.c
> +++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-xiic.c
> @@ -721,6 +721,8 @@ static irqreturn_t xiic_process(int irq, void *dev_id)
>  			wakeup_req = 1;
>  			wakeup_code = STATE_ERROR;
>  		}
> +		/* don't try to handle other events */
> +		goto out;

why don't we have goto's after every irq evaluation but only
here? Do the issues you mentioned happen olny in this particular
error case?

Thanks,
Andi

>  	}
>  	if (pend & XIIC_INTR_RX_FULL_MASK) {
>  		/* Receive register/FIFO is full */
> -- 
> 2.40.1
> 

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ