netdev - RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: txgbe: Fix unsigned comparison to zero in txgbe_calc_eeprom

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]

Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2023 10:47:56 +0800
From: Jiawen Wu <jiawenwu@...stnetic.com>
To: "'YueHaibing'" <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
	<mengyuanlou@...-swift.com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>,
	<edumazet@...gle.com>,
	<kuba@...nel.org>,
	<pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next 2/2] net: txgbe: Fix unsigned comparison to zero in txgbe_calc_eeprom_checksum()

On Saturday, November 5, 2022 4:07 PM, YueHaibing wrote:
> The error checks on checksum for a negative error return always fails because
> it is unsigned and can never be negative.
> 
> Fixes: 049fe5365324 ("net: txgbe: Add operations to interact with firmware")
> Signed-off-by: YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>
> ---
>  drivers/net/ethernet/wangxun/txgbe/txgbe_hw.c | 5 +++--
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/wangxun/txgbe/txgbe_hw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/wangxun/txgbe/txgbe_hw.c
> index 9cf5fe33118e..167f7ff73192 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/wangxun/txgbe/txgbe_hw.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/wangxun/txgbe/txgbe_hw.c
> @@ -200,10 +200,11 @@ static int txgbe_calc_eeprom_checksum(struct txgbe_hw *hw, u16 *checksum)
>  	if (eeprom_ptrs)
>  		kvfree(eeprom_ptrs);
> 
> -	*checksum = TXGBE_EEPROM_SUM - *checksum;
> -	if (*checksum < 0)
> +	if (*checksum > TXGBE_EEPROM_SUM)
>  		return -EINVAL;
> 
> +	*checksum = TXGBE_EEPROM_SUM - *checksum;
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }

It is a pity, I didn't review this patch carefully. *checksum will sometimes
be larger than TXGBE_EEPROM_SUM. It's correct to remove these two lines:

-	if (*checksum < 0)
-		return -EINVAL;

I'll send a patch to fix it.