linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] Bluetooth: Fix Bluetooth for BCM4377 on T2 Intel MacBooks

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: <ZZZqgsjeY3R4YlVG@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2024 09:21:22 +0100
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Sven Peter <sven@...npeter.dev>
Cc: Aditya Garg <gargaditya08@...e.com>,
	Paul Menzel <pmenzel@...gen.mpg.de>,
	Felix Zhang <mrman@...an314.tech>, linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
	Hector Martin <marcan@...can.st>,
	Bagas Sanjaya <bagasdotme@...il.com>,
	Alyssa Rosenzweig <alyssa@...enzweig.io>,
	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
	Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
	Orlando Chamberlain <orlandoch.dev@...il.com>, kekrby@...il.com,
	admin@...eit.net, Janne Grunau <j@...nau.net>,
	asahi@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Bluetooth: Fix Bluetooth for BCM4377 on T2 Intel
 MacBooks

On Thu, Jan 04, 2024 at 08:50:19AM +0100, Sven Peter wrote:
> > On 4. Jan 2024, at 08:47, Aditya Garg <gargaditya08@...e.com> wrote:
> >> On 28-Dec-2023, at 5:41 PM, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org> wrote:

> >> Ok, good, then this patch and the one I posted are mostly equivalent
> >> assuming that the BCM4378/4387 return an invalid address during setup.
> >> 
> >> This patch may be preferred as it does not need to rely on such
> >> assumptions, though.

> > So what's the final take on this? Which one is gonna be merged upstream?
> 
> I would’ve preferred this one (possibly with a better commit message)
> since it’s more explicit and doesn’t rely on additional assumptions
> but it looks like Johan’s version was already merged.

Which addresses do BCM4378/4387 return before they are configured?
Should be easy enough to verify that the current check for invalid
addresses catches those or otherwise add them to the list.

Johan