linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] net: ethernet: adi: adin1110: Fix some error handling path in adin1110_read

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: <20241004113735.GF1310185@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 12:37:35 +0100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Lennart Franzen <lennart@...omain.com>,
	Alexandru Tachici <alexandru.tachici@...log.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: ethernet: adi: adin1110: Fix some error
 handling path in adin1110_read_fifo()

On Thu, Oct 03, 2024 at 08:53:15PM +0200, Christophe JAILLET wrote:
> If 'frame_size' is too small or if 'round_len' is an error code, it is
> likely that an error code should be returned to the caller.
> 
> Actually, 'ret' is likely to be 0, so if one of these sanity checks fails,
> 'success' is returned.

Hi Christophe,

I think we can say "'ret' will be 0".
At least that is what my brief investigation tells me.

> 
> Return -EINVAL instead.

Please include some information on how this was found and tested.
e.g.

Found by inspection / Found using widget-ng.
Compile tested only.

> 
> Fixes: bc93e19d088b ("net: ethernet: adi: Add ADIN1110 support")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
> ---
> This patch is speculative.
> If returning 0 is what was intended, then an explicit 0 would be better.

In my brief investigation I see that adin1110_read_fifo()
is only called by adin1110_read_frames(), like this:

	while (budget) {
		...

		ret = adin1110_read_fifo(port_priv);
		if (ret < 0)
			return;

		budget--;
	}

So the question becomes, should a failure in reading the fifo,
because of an invalid frame size, be treated as an error
and terminate reading frames.

Like you, I speculate the answer is yes.
But I think we need a bit more certainty to take this patch.

-- 
pw-bot: under-review