From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout7-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout7-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FD40E573; Sat, 15 Jun 2024 05:13:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718428419; cv=none; b=dKftL0BYqyTg/3az0xbsEyRANzguuZ2tuk9koVKZNx8gPTkAbwBNhJxWuBdZtzQiYHkR5MitrgxKSXkb/0vkTgZRws6vWbvDiq9y3CXUuWefkGFGXusd4fnJImbg8iulZcd7Bilad2pNjNxQSx/c2Vqu7h0krjENfZ7bWVhMc6E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1718428419; c=relaxed/simple; bh=SI1QOdKUoEppwPF2MWp9YUkmuFhIruEH+JNhT0Da0oE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=CiTZX51u3TYiBYL+TC1XGWfe3nJ8n+ljRByME2U2M3PBEX3xIkVzyLOSMiJGPf4/2oc/tdX2BH1koKODnYoy2Z9rXM7vbM552AplvbFWBjT74KYuHqdVebm8Byn+4AeJANW0cbpE0ajxJk2o+BBUZU6gosw+3Qv290ei+ZMx+5A= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sakamocchi.jp; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sakamocchi.jp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sakamocchi.jp header.i=@sakamocchi.jp header.b=GoSuQ9cn; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=gxIq/0H+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=sakamocchi.jp Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=sakamocchi.jp Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sakamocchi.jp header.i=@sakamocchi.jp header.b="GoSuQ9cn"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="gxIq/0H+" Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailfout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C8AD13803E8; Sat, 15 Jun 2024 01:13:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 15 Jun 2024 01:13:35 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sakamocchi.jp; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1718428415; x= 1718514815; bh=ULe3PHZaVWu+u67al/fCAttGBkzxQ4k67WbosEG1VZw=; b=G oSuQ9cn2uLDM5kStNzwuAwg6aTRqGeMHr2Q4+Xqtr/hwRjEt4L8XKA9avF0AUCth cdXkM5qIMhUyIHNo2Sa1vyx9kB6oBxFtCljcUR8l2II5ZYv++cd+YGkLDyhkZzKT ipZ/hhiegMeUQagkDLC+vSKlQNmxGSmhkMc5MmYwL8KVs4QG5sfg/5eSbr2YRoFI u3lsSuptZ+vAdgn8KnKwrZ0b9ue0kDTkGniyF8vDBdYWj7PClyacFGe1oHUVJvPW QLnbexSHVLO3xtWzpUiUdaXg9adc+zB4JiRb5iiUXL7Cf7ove6aCp2a3QYarJZ0K 9y/i/NcaZYQHHMl68BMUg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm1; t=1718428415; x=1718514815; bh=ULe3PHZaVWu+u67al/fCAttGBkzx Q4k67WbosEG1VZw=; b=gxIq/0H+o95VvUXA+EQLc9TbEBUbGv/ykgz2Qt8zYO9s N41zrKN5QPG6zrIF9VtjAbvnqK8jLOV3rdLLRXKmKKPDzlNJWs81YANSddzjeJXV WVsLiTlIe9E6+K3VjM/YWIPMmodRlG79JLTphUB+AbudnFRDVvn64pY9kptqbwNU qEQEpS5SJlYToOyNsjJByCKm2fe/p67TDk7MlAPm/H2aE0B5+Snm+4ZRPb3PFGv+ NNxM9x9qv0YZbKoFDoPCOCm3vetLSm/hzwyg1kE9VAW5gajeqKqtHArrj7KK8Cd3 5X2uvGrS9MqB4sbV5sKSltGqmltn/B/RZ7kxhnzZDw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvledrfedvtddgledtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepfffhvfevuffkfhggtggujgesthdtredttddtvdenucfhrhhomhepvfgrkhgr shhhihcuufgrkhgrmhhothhouceoohdqthgrkhgrshhhihesshgrkhgrmhhotggthhhird hjpheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepveeilefhudekffehkeffudduvedvfeduleelfeeg ieeljeehjeeuvdeghfetvedvnecuffhomhgrihhnpehkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghenucevlh hushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehoqdhtrghkrghs hhhisehsrghkrghmohgttghhihdrjhhp X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: ie8e14432:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat, 15 Jun 2024 01:13:32 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2024 14:13:29 +0900 From: Takashi Sakamoto To: Takashi Iwai Cc: linux-sound@vger.kernel.org, Paul Menzel , Mark Brown , Jaroslav Kysela , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/6] ALSA: control: Apply sanity check of input values for user elements Message-ID: <20240615051329.GA494527@workstation.local> References: <20240614153717.30143-1-tiwai@suse.de> <20240614153717.30143-4-tiwai@suse.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-sound@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240614153717.30143-4-tiwai@suse.de> Hi, On Fri, Jun 14, 2024 at 05:37:12PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote: > Although we have already a mechanism for sanity checks of input values > for control writes, it's not applied unless the kconfig > CONFIG_SND_CTL_INPUT_VALIDATION is set due to the performance reason. > Nevertheless, it still makes sense to apply the check for user > elements despite of its cost, as that's the only way to filter out the > invalid values; the user controls are handled solely in ALSA core > code, and there is no corresponding driver, after all. > > This patch enables the input value validation for user control > elements no matter whether CONFIG_SND_CTL_INPUT_VALIDATION is set or > not. The kselftest will be happier with this change, as the incorrect > values will be bailed out now with errors. > > For other normal controls, the check is applied still only when > CONFIG_SND_CTL_INPUT_VALIDATION is set. > > Reported-by: Paul Menzel > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/1d44be36-9bb9-4d82-8953-5ae2a4f09405@molgen.mpg.de > Reviewed-by: Jaroslav Kysela > Reviewed-by: Mark Brown > Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai > --- > sound/core/control.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/sound/core/control.c b/sound/core/control.c > index fb0c60044f7b..50890983d7e2 100644 > --- a/sound/core/control.c > +++ b/sound/core/control.c > @@ -1317,7 +1317,8 @@ static int snd_ctl_elem_write(struct snd_card *card, struct snd_ctl_file *file, > snd_ctl_build_ioff(&control->id, kctl, index_offset); > result = snd_power_ref_and_wait(card); > /* validate input values */ > - if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_CTL_INPUT_VALIDATION) && !result) { > + if ((IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SND_CTL_INPUT_VALIDATION) || > + (vd->access & SNDRV_CTL_ELEM_ACCESS_USER)) && !result) { > struct snd_ctl_elem_info info; > > memset(&info, 0, sizeof(info)); In my opinion, the validation in 'snd_ctl_elem_user_put()' is preferable instead. In the function, it is free to access to 'struct user_element.info' for the validation. In the commit coment, I can see "that's the only way to filter out the invalid values", however it not so good idea, since the ALSA control core function loses transparency against control elements somehow. Furthermore, I can see "there is no corresponding driver", however it is suspicious somehow. It would be smart to charge the validation implementation for user-defined control element set if forcing it. Regards Takashi Sakamoto