linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] usb: xhci: fixes lost of data for xHCI Cadence Controllers

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: <20240830174504.1282f7b4@foxbook>
Date: Fri, 30 Aug 2024 17:45:04 +0200
From: Michał Pecio <michal.pecio@...il.com>
To: pawell@...ence.com, peter.chen@...nel.org
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, mathias.nyman@...el.com, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] usb: xhci: fixes lost of data for xHCI Cadence
 Controllers

Hi,

> Field Rsvd0 is reserved field, so patch should not have impact for
> other xHCI controllers.
Wait, is this a case of Linux failing to zero-initialize something that
should be zero initialized before use (why not explain it as such?), or
are you suggesting monkeying with internal xHC data at run time, in area
which is known to actually be used by at least one implementation?

There is no mention of Rsvd0 in the xHCI spec, did you mean RsvdO?

Reserved and Opaque, 
For exclusive use by the xHC.
Software shall *not* write this, unless allowed by the vendor.

Cadence isn't the only xHC vendor...

(There is no mention of "Stream Endpoint Context" either, so maybe you
meant "Stream Context" or "Endpoint Context"...)

Regards,
Michal