Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 2 authors, 2017-05-18

Re: [PATCH] hdlcdrv: fix divide error bug if bitrate is 0

From: Firo Yang <hidden>
Date: 2017-05-18 03:29:30
Also in: linux-hams

On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 06:08:11PM +0200, walter harms wrote:

Am 17.05.2017 15:42, schrieb Firo Yang:
quoted
On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:59:39PM +0200, walter harms wrote:
quoted

Am 17.05.2017 14:35, schrieb Firo Yang:
quoted
The divisor s->par.bitrate will always be 0 until initialized by
ndo_open() and hdlcdrv_open().

In order to fix this divide zero error, check whether the netdevice
was opened by ndo_open() before performing divide.

Reported-by: Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Firo Yang <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/hamradio/hdlcdrv.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/hamradio/hdlcdrv.c b/drivers/net/hamradio/hdlcdrv.c
index 8c3633c..3c783fd 100644
--- a/drivers/net/hamradio/hdlcdrv.c
+++ b/drivers/net/hamradio/hdlcdrv.c
@@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ static int hdlcdrv_ioctl(struct net_device *dev, struct ifreq *ifr, int cmd)
 		break;		
 
 	case HDLCDRVCTL_CALIBRATE:
-		if(!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO))
+		if (!capable(CAP_SYS_RAWIO) || !netif_running(dev))
 			return -EPERM;
 		if (bi.data.calibrate > INT_MAX / s->par.bitrate)
 			return -EINVAL;
I would still check for s->par.bitrate > 0 later changes may affect the setting of it
and it is much more obvious.
I think 0 is not valid value for bitrate, so we should check it in
other places, like what ser12_open() did:
429         if (bc->baud < 300 || bc->baud > 4800) {
430                 printk(KERN_INFO "baycom_ser_fdx: invalid baudrate "
431                                 "(300...4800)\n");
432                 return -EINVAL;
433         }
...
440         bc->hdrv.par.bitrate = bc->baud;

I do not want to say you change is not valid but i have learned that it is better to
have an obvious check that to rely on hidden knowledge.
I agree with this.
quoted
quoted
Also perhaps !netif_running(dev) should better return ENODEV.
However, the 'dev' truly exists in this circumstance.
yes and i do not feel good with that but "no permission" will lead
any enduser into a search for user rights.
Indeed, ENODEV is more informative to enduser.
I will send a update patch.

Thanks,
Firo


re,
wh

quoted
Thanks,
Firo
quoted

just my 2 cents,
re,
wh
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help