netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/5] net: wwan: t7xx: Infrastructure for early port configuration

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: <6c9777ed-8514-6a34-02c7-b8d5af7018f6@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Thu, 18 Aug 2022 16:56:39 +0530
From:   "Kumar, M Chetan" <m.chetan.kumar@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     m.chetan.kumar@...el.com, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        kuba@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, johannes@...solutions.net,
        ryazanov.s.a@...il.com, loic.poulain@...aro.org,
        krishna.c.sudi@...el.com, linuxwwan@...el.com,
        Haijun Liu <haijun.liu@...iatek.com>,
        Madhusmita Sahu <madhusmita.sahu@...el.com>,
        Ricardo Martinez <ricardo.martinez@...ux.intel.com>,
        Devegowda Chandrashekar <chandrashekar.devegowda@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/5] net: wwan: t7xx: Infrastructure for early
 port configuration

On 8/18/2022 4:21 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Aug 2022, Kumar, M Chetan wrote:
> 
>> On 8/17/2022 5:40 PM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
>>> On Tue, 16 Aug 2022, m.chetan.kumar@...el.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> From: Haijun Liu <haijun.liu@...iatek.com>
>>>>
>>
>> <skip>
>>
>>>> @@ -372,7 +435,8 @@ static int t7xx_port_proxy_recv_skb(struct cldma_queue
>>>> *queue, struct sk_buff *s
>>>>      	seq_num = t7xx_port_next_rx_seq_num(port, ccci_h);
>>>>    	port_conf = port->port_conf;
>>>> -	skb_pull(skb, sizeof(*ccci_h));
>>>> +	if (!port->port_conf->is_early_port)
>>>> +		skb_pull(skb, sizeof(*ccci_h));
>>>
>>> This seems to be the only user for is_early_port, wouldn't be more obvious
>>> to store the header size instead?
>>
>> Early port doesn't carry header.
>> If we change it to header size, skb_pull() operators on zero length.
> 
> Is that a problem?

Looking into the implementation details, feels like it should be OK.
But knowingly the len is zero thought to avoid.

> 
>> OR may need another such flag to bypass it.
> 
> You could use if (header_size) if you don't want to skb_pull with zero len
> so I don't know why another flag would be needed?

Ok. I will replace is_early_port with header_size & use it as check for 
skb_pull().

-- 
Chetan