netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/2] rt2x00: Remove unusued value

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: <20250103131002.GA100011@wp.pl>
Date: Fri, 3 Jan 2025 14:10:02 +0100
From: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@...pl>
To: Daniel Golle <daniel@...rotopia.org>
Cc: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@...ecom.fr>,
	linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Kalle Valo <kvalo@...nel.org>,
	Tomislav Požega <pozega.tomislav@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] rt2x00: Remove unusued value

On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 11:40:52AM +0000, Daniel Golle wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 03, 2025 at 09:55:40AM +0100, Stanislaw Gruszka wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 21, 2024 at 01:39:32PM +0100, Ariel Otilibili wrote:
> > > Coverity-ID: 1525307
> > > Signed-off-by: Ariel Otilibili <ariel.otilibili-anieli@...ecom.fr>
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c | 6 ------
> > >  1 file changed, 6 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> > > index 60c2a12e9d5e..e5f553a1ea24 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/ralink/rt2x00/rt2800lib.c
> > > @@ -8882,13 +8882,10 @@ static void rt2800_rxiq_calibration(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
> > >  
> > >  	for (ch_idx = 0; ch_idx < 2; ch_idx = ch_idx + 1) {
> > >  		if (ch_idx == 0) {
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r1 & (~0x3);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r1 | 0x1;
> > 
> > I wonder if intention here was different, for example:
> > 
> >  			rfval = rfb0r1 & (~0x3);
> >   			rfval = rfval | 0x1;
> > 
> > For me the patch looks ok - it does not change existing behaviour,
> > since rfval is overwritten by second line anyway.
> 
> I agree with the likely intention here, however, the vendor driver
> also comes with the dead code, see
> https://github.com/lixuande/rt2860v2/blob/master/files/rt2860v2/common/cmm_rf_cal.c#L2690
> 
> So this is certainly a bug in the vendor driver as well which got ported
> bug-by-bug to rt2x00... Not sure what is the best thing to do in this
> case.

As this was already tested and match vendor driver I would prefer
not to change behavior even if it looks suspicious.

Regards
Stanislaw

> > Acked-by: Stanislaw Gruszka <stf_xl@...pl>
> > 
> > But Tomislav and Daniel, please check if this code is correct.
> > 
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 1, rfval);
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r2 & (~0x33);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r2 | 0x11;
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 2, rfval);
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r42 & (~0x50);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r42 | 0x10;
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 42, rfval);
> > >  
> > > @@ -8901,13 +8898,10 @@ static void rt2800_rxiq_calibration(struct rt2x00_dev *rt2x00dev)
> > >  
> > >  			rt2800_bbp_dcoc_write(rt2x00dev, 1, 0x00);
> > >  		} else {
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r1 & (~0x3);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r1 | 0x2;
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 1, rfval);
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r2 & (~0x33);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r2 | 0x22;
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 2, rfval);
> > > -			rfval = rfb0r42 & (~0x50);
> > >  			rfval = rfb0r42 | 0x40;
> > >  			rt2800_rfcsr_write_bank(rt2x00dev, 0, 42, rfval);
> > >  
> > > -- 
> > > 2.47.1
> > > 
> >