[PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c | 13 ++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
index da310de06bf6..5b7923c0698c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
@@ -242,6 +242,7 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 	if (priv->device->of_node) {
 		struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
 		u32 delays[3];
+		int ret;
 
 		reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(priv->device,
 						     "snps,reset",
@@ -249,9 +250,15 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 		if (IS_ERR(reset_gpio))
 			return PTR_ERR(reset_gpio);
 
-		device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
-					       "snps,reset-delays-us",
-					       delays, ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		ret = device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
+						     "snps,reset-delays-us",
+						     delays,
+						     ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(ndev->dev.parent,
+				"invalid property snps,reset-delays-us\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
 
 		if (delays[0])
 			msleep(DIV_ROUND_UP(delays[0], 1000));
-- 
2.20.1

[PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c | 13 ++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
index da310de06bf6..5b7923c0698c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
@@ -242,6 +242,7 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 	if (priv->device->of_node) {
 		struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
 		u32 delays[3];
+		int ret;
 
 		reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(priv->device,
 						     "snps,reset",
@@ -249,9 +250,15 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 		if (IS_ERR(reset_gpio))
 			return PTR_ERR(reset_gpio);
 
-		device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
-					       "snps,reset-delays-us",
-					       delays, ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		ret = device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
+						     "snps,reset-delays-us",
+						     delays,
+						     ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(ndev->dev.parent,
+				"invalid property snps,reset-delays-us\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
 
 		if (delays[0])
 			msleep(DIV_ROUND_UP(delays[0], 1000));
-- 
2.20.1

[PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin King]

From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c | 13 ++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
index da310de06bf6..5b7923c0698c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c
@@ -242,6 +242,7 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 	if (priv->device->of_node) {
 		struct gpio_desc *reset_gpio;
 		u32 delays[3];
+		int ret;
 
 		reset_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(priv->device,
 						     "snps,reset",
@@ -249,9 +250,15 @@ int stmmac_mdio_reset(struct mii_bus *bus)
 		if (IS_ERR(reset_gpio))
 			return PTR_ERR(reset_gpio);
 
-		device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
-					       "snps,reset-delays-us",
-					       delays, ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		ret = device_property_read_u32_array(priv->device,
+						     "snps,reset-delays-us",
+						     delays,
+						     ARRAY_SIZE(delays));
+		if (ret) {
+			dev_err(ndev->dev.parent,
+				"invalid property snps,reset-delays-us\n");
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
 
 		if (delays[0])
 			msleep(DIV_ROUND_UP(delays[0], 1000));
-- 
2.20.1


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[David Miller]

From: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 17:58:36 +0100

> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>

Applied to net-next, thanks Colin.

Please make the destination tree explicit in the future by putting
something like "[PATCH net-next]" in the Subject line.

Thank you.

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[David Miller]

From: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 17:58:36 +0100

> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>

Applied to net-next, thanks Colin.

Please make the destination tree explicit in the future by putting
something like "[PATCH net-next]" in the Subject line.

Thank you.

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[David Miller]

From: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2019 17:58:36 +0100

> From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 
> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>

Applied to net-next, thanks Colin.

Please make the destination tree explicit in the future by putting
something like "[PATCH net-next]" in the Subject line.

Thank you.

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

RE: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
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)


Thank you!
Martin


[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638

RE: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
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)


Thank you!
Martin


[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638

RE: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
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)


Thank you!
Martin


[0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 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)
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> 
Is that the correct link?

Colin

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 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)
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> 
Is that the correct link?

Colin

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> 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)
> 
> 
> Thank you!
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> 
Is that the correct link?

Colin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > 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)
> >
> >
> > Thank you!
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> >
> Is that the correct link?
sorry, that is a totally unrelated link
the correct link is: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1118313/

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > 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)
> >
> >
> > Thank you!
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> >
> Is that the correct link?
sorry, that is a totally unrelated link
the correct link is: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1118313/

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > 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)
> >
> >
> > Thank you!
> > Martin
> >
> >
> > [0] https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/4/19/638
> >
> Is that the correct link?
sorry, that is a totally unrelated link
the correct link is: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1118313/

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > Hi Colin,
> > >
> > >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > > 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?


Martin


[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id„ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > Hi Colin,
> > >
> > >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > > 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?


Martin


[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id=84ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > Hi Colin,
> > >
> > >> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > > 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?


Martin


[0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id=84ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>> 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?

I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.

Colin
> 
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id„ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>> 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?

I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.

Colin
> 
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id=84ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> Hi Colin,
> 
> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>> 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?

I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.

Colin
> 
> 
> Martin
> 
> 
> [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/davem/net-next.git/commit/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_mdio.c?id=84ce4d0f9f55b4f4ca4d4edcbb54a23d9dad1aae
> 


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Colin,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>> 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?
>
> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
gentle ping
(I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Colin,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>> 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?
>
> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
gentle ping
(I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > Hi Colin,
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Colin,
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>> 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?
>
> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
gentle ping
(I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>> 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.

Colin

>>
>> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
> gentle ping
> (I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>> 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.

Colin

>>
>> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
> gentle ping
> (I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>> Hi Colin,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>> 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.

Colin

>>
>> I'm out of the office today. I'll get back to you on this tomorrow.
> gentle ping
> (I will be away for the weekend but I can reply on Monday)
> 


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
<colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>> Hi Colin,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>>>> 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?


Martin

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
<colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>> Hi Colin,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>>>> 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?


Martin

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

Hi Colin,

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
<colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>
> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>> Hi Colin,
> >>>
> >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> >>>>>> 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?


Martin

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > >>>>>> 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]


[0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1125686/

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > >>>>>> 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]


[0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1125686/

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Martin Blumenstingl]

On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
<martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Colin,
>
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > > On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>
> > >>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
> > >>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> > >>>>>> Hi Colin,
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
> > >>>>>> 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]


[0] https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/1125686/

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 01/07/2019 23:43, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
>> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>>>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>>>>> 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/
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 01/07/2019 23:43, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
>> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>>>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>>>>> 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/
> 

Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: add sanity check to device_property_read_u32_array call

[Colin Ian King]

On 01/07/2019 23:43, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 6:05 PM Martin Blumenstingl
> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Colin,
>>
>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 10:32 AM Colin Ian King
>> <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 28/06/2019 05:15, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>> On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 9:58 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 25/06/2019 05:44, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 3:34 AM Martin Blumenstingl
>>>>>> <martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 8:55 AM Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 19/06/2019 06:13, Martin Blumenstingl wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Colin,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 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 <colin.king@canonical.com>
>>>>>>>>> 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/
> 


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel