Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 23 Nov 2021 11:42:12 +0530 | From | jeyr@codeauro ... | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] misc: fastrpc: fix improper packet size calculation |
| |
On 2021-11-19 18:23, Greg KH wrote: > On Fri, Nov 19, 2021 at 06:19:27PM +0530, jeyr@codeaurora.org wrote: >> On 2021-09-21 18:43, jeyr@codeaurora.org wrote: >> > On 2021-09-21 18:10, Greg KH wrote: >> > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 06:03:42PM +0530, jeyr@codeaurora.org wrote: >> > > > On 2021-09-21 17:22, Greg KH wrote: >> > > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2021 at 05:18:15PM +0530, Jeya R wrote: >> > > > > > The buffer list is sorted and this is not being considered while >> > > > > > calculating packet size. This would lead to improper copy length >> > > > > > calculation for non-dmaheap buffers which would eventually cause >> > > > > > sending improper buffers to DSP. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Fixes: c68cfb718c8f ("misc: fastrpc: Add support for context Invoke >> > > > > > method") >> > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jeya R <jeyr@codeaurora.org> >> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org> >> > > > > >> > > > > Does this also need to go to the stable kernels? >> > > > Yes, this needs to go to stable kernels also as this fixes a >> > > > potential issue >> > > > which is easily reproducible. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > --- >> > > > > > Changes in v3: >> > > > > > - relocate patch change list >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Changes in v2: >> > > > > > - updated commit message to proper format >> > > > > > - added fixes tag to commit message >> > > > > > - removed unnecessary variable initialization >> > > > > > - removed length check during payload calculation >> > > > > > >> > > > > > drivers/misc/fastrpc.c | 10 ++++++---- >> > > > > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c >> > > > > > index beda610..69d45c4 100644 >> > > > > > --- a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c >> > > > > > +++ b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c >> > > > > > @@ -719,16 +719,18 @@ static int fastrpc_get_meta_size(struct >> > > > > > fastrpc_invoke_ctx *ctx) >> > > > > > static u64 fastrpc_get_payload_size(struct fastrpc_invoke_ctx *ctx, >> > > > > > int metalen) >> > > > > > { >> > > > > > u64 size = 0; >> > > > > > - int i; >> > > > > > + int oix; >> > > > > >> > > > > What does "oix" stand for? What was wrong with i? >> > > > It is just a general convention we use. "oix" is used to iterate >> > > > through >> > > > sorted overlap buffer list and use "i" to get corresponding >> > > > unsorted list >> > > > index. We follow the same convention at other places also, for >> > > > example: >> > > > fastrpc_get_args function. >> > > >> > > That is the only place it is used in all of the whole kernel tree. It >> > > is not a normal variable for a loop, so who is "we" here? >> > The convention was followed for the same file(fastrpc.c). As part of >> > fastrpc_get_args >> > function, while iterating through sorted buffer list, oix is used as >> > index and to >> > get unsorted index "raix", it is using "i". Just following the same way >> > here to >> > have better understanding. Please let me know if this is a concern, it >> > can be updated >> > to "i", "j" etc. >> > >> > -- Thanks >> > > >> > > thanks, >> > > >> > > greg k-h >> Hello Greg, >> >> Is this bug-fix patch planned to be released? > > Released in what way? By release, I mean picked to your misc driver git tree. > > I do not see it in any tree anywhere, perhaps it needs to be > resubmitted > to be accepted? Sure, will resubmit the patch. Thanks. > > thanks, > > greg k-h
| |