linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/2] usb: typec: tipd: fix event checking in interrupt service routines

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]

Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 17:47:55 +0100
From: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco@...fvision.net>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
 Abdel Alkuor <abdelalkuor@...tab.com>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 0/2] usb: typec: tipd: fix event checking in
 interrupt service routines

On 3/28/24 17:44, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 28, 2024 at 05:25:20PM +0100, Javier Carrasco wrote:
>> The ISRs of the tps25750 and tps6598x do not handle generated events
>> properly under all circumstances.
>>
>> The tps6598x ISR does not read all bits of the INT_EVENTX registers,
>> leaving events signaled with bits above 64 unattended. Moreover, these
>> events are not cleared, leaving the interrupt enabled.
>>
>> The tps25750 reads all bits of the INT_EVENT1 register, but the event
>> checking is not right because the same event is checked in two different
>> regions of the same register by means of an OR operation.
>>
>> This series aims to fix both issues by reading all bits of the
>> INT_EVENTX registers, and limiting the event checking to the region
>> where the supported events are defined (currently they are limited to
>> the first 64 bits of the registers, as the are defined as BIT_ULL()).
>>
>> If the need for events above the first 64 bits of the INT_EVENTX
>> registers arises, a different mechanism might be required. But for the
>> current needs, all definitions can be left as they are.
>>
>> Note: resend to add 'stable' mailing list (fixes in the series).
> 
> 
> <formletter>
> 
> This is not the correct way to submit patches for inclusion in the
> stable kernel tree.  Please read:
>     https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/stable-kernel-rules.html
> for how to do this properly.
> 
> </formletter>

Sorry, I will add stable@...r.kernel.org right above the Signed-off-by:
instead of adding to the Cc list and resend again.