Re: [PATCH] RFC: Bluetooth: missed cpu_to_le16 conversion in hci_init4_req
From: Simon Horman <hidden>
Date: 2019-10-16 12:20:30
Also in:
linux-bluetooth, lkml
On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 12:39:43PM +0100, Ben Dooks (Codethink) wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
It looks like in hci_init4_req() the request is being initialised from cpu-endian data but the packet is specified to be little-endian. This causes an warning from sparse due to __le16 to u16 conversion. Fix this by using cpu_to_le16() on the two fields in the packet. net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:845:27: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:845:27: expected restricted __le16 [usertype] tx_len net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:845:27: got unsigned short [usertype] le_max_tx_len net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:846:28: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different base types) net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:846:28: expected restricted __le16 [usertype] tx_time net/bluetooth/hci_core.c:846:28: got unsigned short [usertype] le_max_tx_time Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <redacted> --- Cc: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org> Cc: Johan Hedberg <redacted> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net> Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --- net/bluetooth/hci_core.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c b/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c index 04bc79359a17..b2559d4bed81 100644 --- a/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c +++ b/net/bluetooth/hci_core.c@@ -842,8 +842,8 @@ static int hci_init4_req(struct hci_request *req, unsigned long opt) if (hdev->le_features[0] & HCI_LE_DATA_LEN_EXT) { struct hci_cp_le_write_def_data_len cp; - cp.tx_len = hdev->le_max_tx_len; - cp.tx_time = hdev->le_max_tx_time; + cp.tx_len = cpu_to_le16(hdev->le_max_tx_len); + cp.tx_time = cpu_to_le16(hdev->le_max_tx_time);
I would suggest that the naming of the le_ fields of struct hci_dev implies that the values stored in those fields should be little endian (but those that are more than bone byte wide are not). In any case, the question arises as to if this has ever worked on big endian machines.
hci_req_add(req, HCI_OP_LE_WRITE_DEF_DATA_LEN, sizeof(cp), &cp); } -- 2.23.0