From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CBAEC7618B for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:47:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA19222CE5 for ; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:47:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="CGmfrsar" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org EA19222CE5 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Cc:List-Subscribe: List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:References: In-Reply-To:Message-Id:Date:Subject:To:From:Reply-To:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=8pDiRrdoE1ZrbhNfL2ZMs3A9Ords0+B4xR5+T3pafI0=; b=CGmfrsarCsP4GatdVuKaIrKlM2 odjxfnGpo0UEkQ6+Q4HNBUmVsIGJVCc0kwb0JuVBurTgVweCQ6OXJprwY3b2QPgRWLGIgUwqCv3qt n8DEqpz3p2CrvQ1qGnBXc48rwHOk/aIpTqP+qbLSXnABdlJaK6ntfIo5aEUuzpjjLoaneIjeQHLeW YbIJFvsFRkfb0dTTGKmmjigSXzHkNVcNGaS2ULOHwjGZcTwqxVwcK2iXtQmaJPj4BlKx4YC5gTZWY jeSCpZ9rj84lUzHoSMzTu2scqFeQmV+qlwtK1IgLjB874OaIzGDIzgcdjQFh+TgNUygmV6wh0UL5X HGWD7DzA==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hr0Yp-000430-5X; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:47:03 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hr0Xx-0003IM-F1 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 13:46:11 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84532152D; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:46:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from usa.arm.com (e107155-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.196.42]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 4C3E33F694; Fri, 26 Jul 2019 06:46:07 -0700 (PDT) From: Sudeep Holla To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: [PATCH v2 3/6] firmware: arm_scmi: Remove extra check for invalid length message responses Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2019 14:45:28 +0100 Message-Id: <20190726134531.8928-4-sudeep.holla@arm.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.17.1 In-Reply-To: <20190726134531.8928-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> References: <20190726134531.8928-1-sudeep.holla@arm.com> X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190726_064609_618991_E0CD1F5D X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 10.13 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Peng Fan , Etienne Carriere , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Bo Zhang , Jim Quinlan , Sudeep Holla , Gaku Inami , Volodymyr Babchuk MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org scmi_xfer_get_init ensures both transmit and receive buffer lengths are within the maximum limits. If receive buffer length is not supplied by the caller, it's set to the maximum limit value. Receive buffer length is never modified after that. So there's no need for the extra check when receive transmit completion for a command essage. Further, if the response header length is greater than the prescribed receive buffer length, the response buffer is truncated to the latter. Reported-by: Jim Quinlan Signed-off-by: Sudeep Holla --- drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c | 6 ------ 1 file changed, 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c index b5bc4c7a8fab..6ef652940099 100644 --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/driver.c @@ -230,12 +230,6 @@ static void scmi_rx_callback(struct mbox_client *cl, void *m) xfer = &minfo->xfer_block[xfer_id]; scmi_dump_header_dbg(dev, &xfer->hdr); - /* Is the message of valid length? */ - if (xfer->rx.len > info->desc->max_msg_size) { - dev_err(dev, "unable to handle %zu xfer(max %d)\n", - xfer->rx.len, info->desc->max_msg_size); - return; - } scmi_fetch_response(xfer, mem); complete(&xfer->done); -- 2.17.1 _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel