| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <a28456f5b8d2477785493c6081f24401@realtek.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2025 08:42:29 +0000
From: Zong-Zhe Yang <kevin_yang@...ltek.com>
To: Mande Imran Ahmed <immu.ahmed1905@...il.com>,
Ping-Ke Shih
<pkshih@...ltek.com>,
"rtl8821cerfe2@...il.com" <rtl8821cerfe2@...il.com>,
Bernie Huang <phhuang@...ltek.com>,
Damon Chen <damon.chen@...ltek.com>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] net:realtek:use sysfs_emit() instead of scnprintf() for sysfs consistency
Mande Imran Ahmed <immu.ahmed1905@...il.com> wrote:
>
> Update the Realtek rtw89 wireless driver to replace scnprintf() with
> sysfs_emit() for formatting sysfs attribute output, in line with the recommendations from
> Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.rst.
>
> This change enhances the safety and correctness of sysfs handling, promotes consistency
> throughout the kernel, and aids long-term maintainability.
>
> Functionality verified using ping, iperf, and connection tests to ensure stability after the
> change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mande Imran Ahmed <immu.ahmed1905@...il.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c | 8 +++----
> drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/sar.c | 30 ++++++++++++------------
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c
> b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c
> index 76a2e26d4a10..a58aefb51fb5 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c
> @@ -2087,19 +2087,19 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(rtw89_phy_ant_gain_pwr_offset);
> int rtw89_print_ant_gain(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t bufsz,
> const struct rtw89_chan *chan) {
> - char *p = buf, *end = buf + bufsz;
> + char *p = buf;
> s8 offset_patha, offset_pathb;
>
> if (!rtw89_can_apply_ant_gain(rtwdev, chan->band_type)) {
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "no DAG is applied\n");
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "no DAG is applied\n");
> goto out;
> }
>
> offset_patha = rtw89_phy_ant_gain_query(rtwdev, RF_PATH_A, chan->freq);
> offset_pathb = rtw89_phy_ant_gain_query(rtwdev, RF_PATH_B, chan->freq);
>
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "ChainA offset: %d dBm\n", offset_patha);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "ChainB offset: %d dBm\n", offset_pathb);
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "ChainA offset: %d dBm\n", offset_patha);
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "ChainB offset: %d dBm\n", offset_pathb);
>
> out:
> return p - buf;
> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/sar.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/sar.c
> index 517b66022f18..80eacada6911 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/sar.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/sar.c
> @@ -318,7 +318,7 @@ int rtw89_print_sar(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t bufsz,
> /* its members are protected by rtw89_sar_set_src() */
> const struct rtw89_sar_handler *sar_hdl = &rtw89_sar_handlers[src];
> const u8 fct_mac = rtwdev->chip->txpwr_factor_mac;
> - char *p = buf, *end = buf + bufsz;
> + char *p = buf;
> int ret;
> s32 cfg;
> u8 fct;
> @@ -326,17 +326,17 @@ int rtw89_print_sar(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t
> bufsz,
> lockdep_assert_wiphy(rtwdev->hw->wiphy);
>
> if (src == RTW89_SAR_SOURCE_NONE) {
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "no SAR is applied\n");
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "no SAR is applied\n");
> goto out;
> }
>
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "source: %d (%s)\n", src,
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "source: %d (%s)\n", src,
> sar_hdl->descr_sar_source);
>
> ret = sar_hdl->query_sar_config(rtwdev, sar_parm, &cfg);
> if (ret) {
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "config: return code: %d\n", ret);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p,
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "config: return code: %d\n", ret);
> + p += sysfs_emit(p,
> "assign: max setting: %d (unit: 1/%lu dBm)\n",
> RTW89_SAR_TXPWR_MAC_MAX, BIT(fct_mac));
> goto out;
> @@ -344,10 +344,10 @@ int rtw89_print_sar(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t
> bufsz,
>
> fct = sar_hdl->txpwr_factor_sar;
>
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "config: %d (unit: 1/%lu dBm)\n", cfg,
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "config: %d (unit: 1/%lu dBm)\n", cfg,
> BIT(fct));
>
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "support different configs by antenna: %s\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "support different configs by antenna: %s\n",
> str_yes_no(rtwdev->chip->support_sar_by_ant));
> out:
> return p - buf;
> @@ -356,24 +356,24 @@ int rtw89_print_sar(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t
> bufsz, int rtw89_print_tas(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, char *buf, size_t bufsz) {
> struct rtw89_tas_info *tas = &rtwdev->tas;
> - char *p = buf, *end = buf + bufsz;
> + char *p = buf;
>
> if (!rtw89_tas_is_active(rtwdev)) {
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "no TAS is applied\n");
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "no TAS is applied\n");
> goto out;
> }
>
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "State: %s\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "State: %s\n",
> rtw89_tas_state_str(tas->state));
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "Average time: %d\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "Average time: %d\n",
> tas->window_size * 2);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "SAR gap: %d dBm\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "SAR gap: %d dBm\n",
> RTW89_TAS_SAR_GAP >> RTW89_TAS_FACTOR);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "DPR gap: %d dBm\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "DPR gap: %d dBm\n",
> RTW89_TAS_DPR_GAP >> RTW89_TAS_FACTOR);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "DPR ON offset: %d dBm\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "DPR ON offset: %d dBm\n",
> RTW89_TAS_DPR_ON_OFFSET >> RTW89_TAS_FACTOR);
> - p += scnprintf(p, end - p, "DPR OFF offset: %d dBm\n",
> + p += sysfs_emit(p, "DPR OFF offset: %d dBm\n",
> RTW89_TAS_DPR_OFF_OFFSET >> RTW89_TAS_FACTOR);
>
> out:
> --
> 2.43.0
(1.) buffer might not just be allocated with PAGE_SIZE
(2.) the pointer passed to leaf function might not point to the head of allocated buffer
Will the above cause some problems ?
For (2.), maybe need to tweak them with sysfs_emit_at() instead of sysfs_emit(). !?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists