netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lan966x: Fix lan966x_ifh

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: <06722642-f934-db3a-f88e-94263592b216@intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 Apr 2023 19:00:20 +0200
From:   Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
CC:     <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>,
        <pabeni@...hat.com>, <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: lan966x: Fix lan966x_ifh_get

From: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Apr 2023 10:20:47 +0200

>>>From time to time, it was observed that the nanosecond part of the
> received timestamp, which is extracted from the IFH, it was actually
> bigger than 1 second. So then when actually calculating the full
> received timestamp, based on the nanosecond part from IFH and the second
> part which is read from HW, it was actually wrong.
> 
> The issue seems to be inside the function lan966x_ifh_get, which
> extracts information from an IFH(which is an byte array) and returns the
> value in a u64. When extracting the timestamp value from the IFH, which
> starts at bit 192 and have the size of 32 bits, then if the most
> significant bit was set in the timestamp, then this bit was extended
> then the return value became 0xffffffff... . To fix this, make sure to
> clear all the other bits before returning the value.

Ooooh, I remember I was having the same issue with sign extension :s
Pls see below.

> 
> Fixes: fd7627833ddf ("net: lan966x: Stop using packing library")
> Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
> index 80e2ea7e6ce8a..508e494dcc342 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_main.c
> @@ -608,6 +608,7 @@ static u64 lan966x_ifh_get(u8 *ifh, size_t pos, size_t length)
>  			val |= (1 << i);

Alternatively, you can change that to (pick one that you like the most):

			val |= 1ULL << i;
			// or
			val |= BIT_ULL(i);

The thing is that constants without any postfix (U, UL etc.) are treated
as signed longs, that's why `1 << 31` becomes 0xffffffff80000000. 1U /
1UL / 1ULL don't.

Adding unsigned postfix may also make it better for 32-bit systems, as
`1 << i` there is 32-bit value, so `1 << 48` may go wrong and/or even
trigger compilers.

>  	}
>  
> +	val &= GENMASK(length, 0);
>  	return val;
>  }
>  

(now blah not directly related to the fix)

I'm wondering a bit if lan966x_ifh_get() can be improved in general to
work with words rather than bits. You read one byte per each bit each
iteration there.
For example, byte arrays could be casted to __be{32,64} and you'd get
native byteorder for 32/64 bits via one __be*_to_cpu*() call.

Thanks,
Olek