netdev - Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: abort and release host after error

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: <20200129180428.GA99393@google.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Jan 2020 10:04:30 -0800
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:     Franky Lin <franky.lin@...adcom.com>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
        Kalle Valo <kvalo@...eaurora.org>,
        Arend van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
        Hante Meuleman <hante.meuleman@...adcom.com>,
        Chi-Hsien Lin <chi-hsien.lin@...ress.com>,
        Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>,
        linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:BROADCOM BRCM80211 IEEE802.11n WIRELESS DRIVER" 
        <brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com>,
        brcm80211-dev-list <brcm80211-dev-list@...ress.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Matthias Kaehlcke <mka@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] brcmfmac: abort and release host after error

Hi Franky,

[I'm very unfamiliar with this driver, but I had the same questions as
Guenter, I think:]

On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:57:59PM -0800, Franky Lin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 4:05 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 03:14:45PM -0800, Doug Anderson wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 2:15 PM Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> > > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
> > > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
> > > > @@ -1938,6 +1938,8 @@ static uint brcmf_sdio_readframes(struct brcmf_sdio *bus, uint maxframes)
> > > >                         if (brcmf_sdio_hdparse(bus, bus->rxhdr, &rd_new,
> > > >                                                BRCMF_SDIO_FT_NORMAL)) {
> > > >                                 rd->len = 0;
> > > > +                               brcmf_sdio_rxfail(bus, true, true);
> > > > +                               sdio_release_host(bus->sdiodev->func1);
> > >
> > > I don't know much about this driver so I don't personally know if
> > > "true, true" is the correct thing to pass to brcmf_sdio_rxfail(), but
> > > it seems plausible.  Definitely the fix to call sdio_release_host() is
> > > sane.
> > >
> > > Thus, unless someone knows for sure that brcmf_sdio_rxfail()'s
> > > parameters should be different:
> > >
> > Actually, looking at brcmf_sdio_hdparse() and its other callers,
> > I think it may not be needed at all - other callers don't do it, and
> > there already are some calls to brcmf_sdio_rxfail() in that function.
> > It would be nice though to get a confirmation before I submit v2.
> 
> I think invoking rxfail with both abort and NACK set to true is the
> right thing to do here so that the pipeline can be properly purged.

Thanks for looking here. I'm not sure I totally understand your answer:
brcmf_sdio_hdparse() already calls brcmf_sdio_rxfail() in several error
cases. Is it really OK to call it twice in a row?

Brian