linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] [scsi] lasi700: Add error handling in lasi700

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]

Message-ID: <fe077251fea010af59214049eea9681b8008852a.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Nov 2023 11:14:24 -0500
From:   James Bottomley <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Haoran Liu <liuhaoran14@....com>
Cc:     martin.petersen@...cle.com, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [scsi] lasi700: Add error handling in lasi700_probe

On Wed, 2023-11-29 at 06:52 -0800, Haoran Liu wrote:
> This patch introduces improved error handling for the dma_set_mask
> and ioremap calls in the lasi700_probe function within
> drivers/scsi/lasi700.c. Previously, the function did not properly
> handle the potential failure of these calls, which could lead to
> improper device initialization and unpredictable behavior.

I have to ask what the point of this is?  There was once an
architecture that couldn't support 32 bit DMA masks (the altix), but
it's long gone.  The structural assumption is that a 32 bit DMA mask
can always be set, so drivers with simple DMA requirements (32 or 64
bit) usually only check 64 and assume they can fallback to 32.

> Although the error addressed by this patch may not occur in the
> current environment, I still suggest implementing these error
> handling routines if the function is not highly time-sensitive. As
> the environment evolves or the code gets reused in different
> contexts, there's a possibility that these errors might occur.
> Addressing them now can prevent potential debugging efforts in the
> future, which could be quite resource-intensive.

This particular operation can never fail on the PA-RISC GSC device,
which is the only one this driver supports, so the driver currently has
no error handling because this is something that can't happen.

James