netdev - Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: Fix error return code in brcmf_sdio_download

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: <b146653a-4113-ea8f-4204-770c7fb5e1cb@huawei.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Dec 2022 12:59:10 +0800
From:   wangyufen <wangyufen@...wei.com>
To:     Arend Van Spriel <arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com>,
        Franky Lin <franky.lin@...adcom.com>
CC:     <aspriel@...il.com>, <hante.meuleman@...adcom.com>,
        <kvalo@...nel.org>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
        <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
        <brcm80211-dev-list.pdl@...adcom.com>,
        <SHA-cyfmac-dev-list@...ineon.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <arend@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wifi: brcmfmac: Fix error return code in
 brcmf_sdio_download_firmware()



在 2022/12/1 14:18, Arend Van Spriel 写道:
> On December 1, 2022 4:01:39 AM wangyufen <wangyufen@...wei.com> wrote:
> 
>> 在 2022/11/30 19:19, Arend van Spriel 写道:
>>> On 11/30/2022 3:00 AM, wangyufen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 在 2022/11/30 1:41, Franky Lin 写道:
>>>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2022 at 1:47 AM Wang Yufen <wangyufen@...wei.com> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fix to return a negative error code -EINVAL instead of 0.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Compile tested only.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: d380ebc9b6fb ("brcmfmac: rename chip download functions")
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Wang Yufen <wangyufen@...wei.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c | 1 +
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
>>>>>> b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
>>>>>> index 465d95d..329ec8ac 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/broadcom/brcm80211/brcmfmac/sdio.c
>>>>>> @@ -3414,6 +3414,7 @@ static int brcmf_sdio_download_firmware(struct
>>>>>> brcmf_sdio *bus,
>>>>>>         /* Take arm out of reset */
>>>>>>         if (!brcmf_chip_set_active(bus->ci, rstvec)) {
>>>>>>                 brcmf_err("error getting out of ARM core reset\n");
>>>>>> +               bcmerror = -EINVAL;
>>>>>
>>>>> ENODEV seems more appropriate here.
>>>>
>>>> However, if brcmf_chip_set_active()  fails in
>>>> brcmf_pcie_exit_download_state(), "-EINVAL" is returned.
>>>> Is it necessary to keep consistent?
>>>
>>> If we can not get the ARM on the chip out of reset things will fail soon
>>> enough further down the road. Anyway, the other function calls return
>>> -EIO so let's do the same here.
>>
>> So -EIO is better?  Anyone else have any other opinions? 😄
> 
> Obviously it is no better than -EINVAL when you look at the behavior. It 
> is just a feeble attempt to be a little bit more consistent. Feel free 
> to change the return value for brcmf_pcie_exit_download_state() as well.
> 
All right, I'll send a v2 and change the error return values on both 
sides to -EIO.

Thanks，
Wang
> Regards,
> Arend
>>>
> 
> 
>