linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] staging: vchiq_core: Refactor notify

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: <e366d563-3560-45f5-aff1-5291a5407c15@stanley.mountain>
Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 17:53:37 +0300
From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>
To: Umang Jain <umang.jain@...asonboard.com>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Broadcom internal kernel review list <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
	linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-staging@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Kieran Bingham <kieran.bingham@...asonboard.com>,
	Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
	kernel-list@...pberrypi.com, Stefan Wahren <wahrenst@....net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/6] staging: vchiq_core: Refactor notify_bulks()

On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 05:39:08PM +0530, Umang Jain wrote:
> diff --git a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> index e9cd012e2b5f..5509f8b1061a 100644
> --- a/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> +++ b/drivers/staging/vc04_services/interface/vchiq_arm/vchiq_core.c
> @@ -1309,6 +1309,48 @@ get_bulk_reason(struct vchiq_bulk *bulk)
>  	return VCHIQ_BULK_RECEIVE_DONE;
>  }
>  
> +static int service_notify_bulk(struct vchiq_service *service,
> +			       struct vchiq_bulk *bulk)
> +{
> +	int status = -EINVAL;
> +
> +	if (!service || !bulk)
> +		return status;

Just return a literal here.  s/return status/return -EINVAL/.
This condition is impossible and the caller doesn't handle the error correctly.

> +
> +	if (bulk->actual != VCHIQ_BULK_ACTUAL_ABORTED) {
> +		if (bulk->dir == VCHIQ_BULK_TRANSMIT) {
> +			VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_tx_count);
> +			VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_tx_bytes,
> +						bulk->actual);
> +		} else {
> +			VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_rx_count);
> +			VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_ADD(service, bulk_rx_bytes,
> +						bulk->actual);
> +				}
> +	} else {
> +		VCHIQ_SERVICE_STATS_INC(service, bulk_aborted_count);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_BLOCKING) {
> +		struct bulk_waiter *waiter;
> +
> +		spin_lock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);
> +		waiter = bulk->userdata;
> +		if (waiter) {
> +			waiter->actual = bulk->actual;
> +			complete(&waiter->event);
> +		}
> +
> +		spin_unlock(&service->state->bulk_waiter_spinlock);

We always return -EINVAL for VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_BLOCKING.

regards,
dan carpenter

> +	} else if (bulk->mode == VCHIQ_BULK_MODE_CALLBACK) {
> +		enum vchiq_reason reason = get_bulk_reason(bulk);
> +		status = make_service_callback(service, reason,	NULL,
> +					       bulk->userdata);
> +	}
> +
> +	return status;
> +}