Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call
From: Colin Ian King <hidden>
Date: 2019-07-02 06:48:22
Also in:
kernel-janitors, linux-arm-kernel, lkml
On 01/07/2019 23:43, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Hi Colin, On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:quoted
On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:quoted
Hi Colin, On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
Hi Colin, On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:quoted
Hi Colin,quoted
Currently the call to device_property_read_u32_array is not error checked leading to potential garbage values in the delays array that are then used in msleep delays. Add a sanity check to the property fetching. Addresses-Coverity: ("Uninitialized scalar variable") Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <redacted>I have also sent a patch [0] to fix initialize the array. can you please look at my patch so we can work out which one to use? my concern is that the "snps,reset-delays-us" property is optional, the current dt-bindings documentation states that it's a required property. in reality it isn't, there are boards (two examples are mentioned in my patch: [0]) without it. so I believe that the resulting behavior has to be: 1. don't delay if this property is missing (instead of delaying for <garbage value> ms) 2. don't error out if this property is missing your patch covers #1, can you please check whether #2 is also covered? I tested case #2 when submitting my patch and it worked fine (even though I could not reproduce the garbage values which are being read on some boards)in the meantime I have tested your patch. when I don't set the "snps,reset-delays-us" property then I get the following error: invalid property snps,reset-delays-us my patch has landed in the meantime: [0] how should we proceed with your patch?Your fix is good, so I think we should just drop/forget about my fix.thank you for looking at the situation as far I understand the -net/-net-next tree all commits are immutable so if we want to remove your patch we need to send a revert do you want me to do that (I can do it on Monday) or will you take care of that?I just sent the patch: [0]
Thank you, much appreciated.
[0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1125686/