netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] netdevsim: add couple of fw_update_flash

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <qtxhmyqmxkwurk62akezcovqt6ybzhk4o3tdmp43fwlbjhnttc@itfqp6muiaxh>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2025 11:15:02 +0200
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, 
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] netdevsim: add couple of fw_update_flash_*
 debugfs knobs

Sun, Jul 20, 2025 at 04:15:02PM +0200, horms@...nel.org wrote:
>On Sat, Jul 19, 2025 at 03:13:15PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
>> 
>> Netdevsim emulates firmware update and it takes 5 seconds to complete.
>> For some usecases, this is too long and unnecessary. Allow user to
>> configure the time by exposing debugfs knobs to set flash size, chunk
>> size and chunk time.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
>
>...
>
>> @@ -1035,20 +1040,20 @@ static int nsim_dev_flash_update(struct devlink *devlink,
>>  						   params->component, 0, 0);
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	for (i = 0; i < NSIM_DEV_FLASH_SIZE / NSIM_DEV_FLASH_CHUNK_SIZE; i++) {
>> +	for (i = 0; i < flash_size / flash_chunk_size; i++) {
>>  		if (nsim_dev->fw_update_status)
>>  			devlink_flash_update_status_notify(devlink, "Flashing",
>>  							   params->component,
>> -							   i * NSIM_DEV_FLASH_CHUNK_SIZE,
>> -							   NSIM_DEV_FLASH_SIZE);
>> -		msleep(NSIM_DEV_FLASH_CHUNK_TIME_MS);
>> +							   i * flash_chunk_size,
>> +							   flash_size);
>> +		msleep(flash_chunk_time_ms);
>>  	}
>
>Hi Jiri,
>
>This loop seems to assume that flash_size is an integer number multiple
>of flash_chunk_size. But with this change that may not be the case,
>leading to less than flash_size bytes being written.
>
>Perhaps the code should to guard against that, or handle it somehow.

Okay, will sanitize that here. Thanks!


>
>>  
>>  	if (nsim_dev->fw_update_status) {
>>  		devlink_flash_update_status_notify(devlink, "Flashing",
>>  						   params->component,
>> -						   NSIM_DEV_FLASH_SIZE,
>> -						   NSIM_DEV_FLASH_SIZE);
>> +						   flash_size,
>> +						   flash_size);
>>  		devlink_flash_update_timeout_notify(devlink, "Flash select",
>>  						    params->component, 81);
>>  		devlink_flash_update_status_notify(devlink, "Flashing done",
>
>...