* [PATCH v2] HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length
@ 2026-07-15 13:57 Pengpeng Hou
2026-07-15 14:34 ` sashiko-bot
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Pengpeng Hou @ 2026-07-15 13:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Rishi Gupta
Cc: Pengpeng Hou, Jiri Kosina, Benjamin Tissoires, linux-i2c,
linux-input, linux-kernel
The MCP2221A data sheet specifies 64-byte HID command and response
reports. mcp2221_raw_event() reads fixed response fields up to byte 55
and can copy a 60-byte I2C payload from byte 4 through byte 63 without
first checking the received size.
HID invokes raw_event() before generic report validation. A short report
can therefore be interpreted beyond its received length. Reject reports
shorter than the fixed protocol size before reading any response fields.
Complete the pending command with -EINVAL for a truncated report so that
a malformed response does not turn into an unrelated timeout.
Fixes: 67a95c21463d ("HID: mcp2221: add usb to i2c-smbus host bridge")
Signed-off-by: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>
---
Changes since v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260715083754.31210-1-pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn/
- validate the fixed 64-byte protocol size instead of the
descriptor-derived report length
- use a named report-size constant and remove matching magic lengths
---
drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c | 19 +++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
index e4ddd8e..c910f66 100644
--- a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
+++ b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
@@ -90,7 +90,8 @@ enum {
MCP2221_DIR_IN = 0x01,
};
-#define MCP_NGPIO 4
+#define MCP2221_REPORT_SIZE 64
+#define MCP_NGPIO 4
/* MCP GPIO set command layout */
struct mcp_set_gpio {
@@ -126,7 +127,7 @@ struct mcp2221 {
struct completion wait_in_report;
struct delayed_work init_work;
u8 *rxbuf;
- u8 txbuf[64];
+ u8 txbuf[MCP2221_REPORT_SIZE];
int rxbuf_idx;
int rxbuf_size;
int status;
@@ -639,11 +640,11 @@ static int mcp_gpio_read_sram(struct mcp2221 *mcp)
{
int ret;
- memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, 64);
+ memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
mcp->txbuf[0] = MCP2221_GET_SRAM_SETTINGS;
mutex_lock(&mcp->lock);
- ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, 64);
+ ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
mutex_unlock(&mcp->lock);
return ret;
@@ -682,7 +683,7 @@ static int mcp2221_check_gpio_pinfunc(struct mcp2221 *mcp)
* Set all bytes to 0, so Bit 7 is not set. The chip
* only changes content of a register when bit 7 is set.
*/
- memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, 64);
+ memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
mcp->txbuf[0] = MCP2221_SET_SRAM_SETTINGS;
/*
@@ -703,7 +704,7 @@ static int mcp2221_check_gpio_pinfunc(struct mcp2221 *mcp)
}
mutex_lock(&mcp->lock);
- ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, 64);
+ ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
mutex_unlock(&mcp->lock);
return ret;
@@ -861,6 +862,12 @@ static int mcp2221_raw_event(struct hid_device *hdev,
u8 *buf;
struct mcp2221 *mcp = hid_get_drvdata(hdev);
+ if (size < MCP2221_REPORT_SIZE) {
+ mcp->status = -EINVAL;
+ complete(&mcp->wait_in_report);
+ return 1;
+ }
+
switch (data[0]) {
case MCP2221_I2C_WR_DATA:
--
2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH v2] HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length
2026-07-15 13:57 [PATCH v2] HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length Pengpeng Hou
@ 2026-07-15 14:34 ` sashiko-bot
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: sashiko-bot @ 2026-07-15 14:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pengpeng Hou; +Cc: dmitry.torokhov, linux-input
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 4 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] Use-After-Free and Out-Of-Bounds Write due to a dangling `mcp->rxbuf` pointer after an I2C transaction times out.
- [Critical] Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) Buffer Overflow in `mcp2221_raw_event` due to non-atomic buffer state updates.
- [High] Concurrent GPIO and I2C operations modify the shared hardware buffer (`mcp->txbuf`) outside of the `mcp->lock` mutex, leading to data corruption.
- [High] Teardown asymmetry and Use-After-Free caused by runtime modification of the `gpio_mode_enforce` module parameter.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCH v2] HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length ---
commit 7349c59966a5598d3165aa4ca24a32b27b7b131a
Author: Pengpeng Hou <pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn>
Subject: HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length
The MCP2221A data sheet specifies 64-byte HID command and response
reports. mcp2221_raw_event() reads fixed response fields up to byte 55
and can copy a 60-byte I2C payload from byte 4 through byte 63 without
first checking the received size. Reject reports shorter than the fixed
protocol size before reading any response fields.
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260715083754.31210-1-pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn/
> diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
> index e4ddd8e9293b6..c910f6636ac95 100644
> --- a/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
> +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-mcp2221.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -639,11 +640,11 @@ static int mcp_gpio_read_sram(struct mcp2221 *mcp)
> {
> int ret;
>
> - memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, 64);
> + memset(mcp->txbuf, 0, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but I noticed mcp->txbuf is being zeroed and
populated here in mcp_gpio_read_sram() (and similarly in mcp_gpio_set() and
mcp_gpio_get()) before acquiring mcp->lock.
Because mcp->txbuf is shared with I2C operations, could this lead to data
corruption if mcp_i2c_xfer() is concurrently preparing an I2C transaction
under the lock? It looks like sysfs GPIO nodes and I2C device interfaces
can race here.
> mcp->txbuf[0] = MCP2221_GET_SRAM_SETTINGS;
>
> mutex_lock(&mcp->lock);
> - ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, 64);
> + ret = mcp_send_data_req_status(mcp, mcp->txbuf, sizeof(mcp->txbuf));
> mutex_unlock(&mcp->lock);
>
> return ret;
[ ... ]
> @@ -861,6 +862,12 @@ static int mcp2221_raw_event(struct hid_device *hdev,
> u8 *buf;
> struct mcp2221 *mcp = hid_get_drvdata(hdev);
>
> + if (size < MCP2221_REPORT_SIZE) {
> + mcp->status = -EINVAL;
> + complete(&mcp->wait_in_report);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but does mcp2221_raw_event() have a
use-after-free or out-of-bounds write risk when handling delayed responses?
If mcp_send_data_req_status() times out inside mcp_i2c_smbus_read(), it
returns early without setting mcp->rxbuf to NULL. When a delayed I2C
response arrives later, wouldn't mcp2221_raw_event() copy up to 60 bytes
into this dangling mcp->rxbuf pointer?
[Severity: Critical]
This is also a pre-existing issue, but is there a TOCTOU race here with how
mcp->rxbuf and mcp->rxbuf_size are updated in mcp_i2c_smbus_read()?
If mcp_i2c_smbus_read() is updating these non-atomically:
mcp_i2c_smbus_read() {
...
mcp->rxbuf = msg->buf;
mcp->rxbuf_size = msg->len;
...
}
and an interrupt fires exactly between assigning a new 1-byte buffer to
mcp->rxbuf and updating mcp->rxbuf_size, could mcp2221_raw_event() bypass
the bounds check by reading the old, larger size?
> switch (data[0]) {
>
> case MCP2221_I2C_WR_DATA:
[ ... ]
[Severity: High]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but could runtime modifications
to the module parameter gpio_mode_enforce lead to a use-after-free during
device removal?
In mcp2221_remove(), the delayed work is conditionally canceled:
mcp2221_remove() {
...
if (!gpio_mode_enforce)
cancel_delayed_work_sync(&mcp->init_work);
...
}
Since gpio_mode_enforce has 0644 permissions, if it is changed to true
after the device is plugged in, won't mcp2221_remove() skip canceling
mcp->init_work? This would leave the work running after the mcp structure
is freed.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260715135916.24417-5-pengpeng@iscas.ac.cn?part=1
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2026-07-15 14:34 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-07-15 13:57 [PATCH v2] HID: mcp2221: validate raw report length Pengpeng Hou
2026-07-15 14:34 ` sashiko-bot
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox