netdev - Re: [PATCH] rsi: Properly initialize data in rsi_sdio_ta

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]

Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 11:56:42 +0300
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>
To:     Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:     Nathan Chancellor <natechancellor@...il.com>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Amitkumar Karwar <amitkarwar@...il.com>,
        Siva Rebbagondla <siva8118@...il.com>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        clang-built-linux <clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rsi: Properly initialize data in rsi_sdio_ta_reset

Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> writes:

>> > @@ -937,7 +937,7 @@ static int rsi_sdio_ta_reset(struct rsi_hw *adapter)
>> >         }
>> >
>> >         rsi_dbg(INIT_ZONE, "%s: Bring TA out of reset\n", __func__);
>> > -       put_unaligned_le32(TA_HOLD_THREAD_VALUE, data);
>> > +       put_unaligned_le32(TA_HOLD_THREAD_VALUE, &data);
>> >         addr = TA_HOLD_THREAD_REG | RSI_SD_REQUEST_MASTER;
>> >         status = rsi_sdio_write_register_multiple(adapter, addr,
>> >                                                   (u8 *)&data,
>
> This is clearly not ok, as put_unaligned_le32() stores four bytes, and
> the local variable is only one byte!
>
> Also, sdio does use DMA for transfers, so the variable has to be
> dynamically allocated. I think your original patch was correct.
> The only change I'd possibly make would be to use
> RSI_9116_REG_SIZE instead of sizeof(u32).

Good point. Nathan please fix this and submit v2.

>> Did any of the maintainers have any comments on what the correct
>> solution is here to resolve this warning? It is one of the few left
>> before we can turn on -Wuninitialized for the whole kernel.
>
> I would argue that this should not stop us from turning it on, as the
> warning is for a clear bug in the code that absolutely needs to be
> fixed, rather than a false-positive.

I can queue v2 for v5.2, just remind me by adding "[PATCH v2 5.2]" to
the subject.

-- 
Kalle Valo