From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (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 9E6FA4756C9 for ; Fri, 7 Aug 2026 11:31:17 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786102279; cv=none; b=aLgiYaElU3LLKqdFuVh6FdAHdjw9TxyfphE+EPOcvjJOektPqWtvqgIFBeaALhVGxcb5/qw84fhz1WcdG34Wckgx/PMPvEeSrWKfRGfkN0+QThzSb0+PlLpItpdoGwBfCBfCCwdvI6iyv7V2umJOEPSBjVZzJwLCbUrvOX9Dfmw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786102279; c=relaxed/simple; bh=G4exCgKpmLLaUI8GUb09KNtiha6U14KQ4TchJZdsbXo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ZczAJxjexW73viKCrjOj1KBBFlLIKOLVvWP4+0FGMPm57tVSSIeBbgFS1OINO2iTTzdl9epWcmZy6PQ8TH0fUmPFCn8v0lR6AyXNG6g8whMCP73leiGDI3VYrSi38G3/i+kWZ6AWCenyYB6Id0KzHv1Lo6iGQ2O1lSolJ736ciE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=GklI105j; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="GklI105j" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1786102278; x=1817638278; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=G4exCgKpmLLaUI8GUb09KNtiha6U14KQ4TchJZdsbXo=; b=GklI105j+27MNZOvxPnTenVIW2XWHeabr3XO0hHfEO7CXb+Er0sKgOOp 909D7KCT17IJ51pMrrpb7jGCmhSSqT2+aYsCNu9ILGCSvUV+ICfLWfWKw H29/2Ns7rfT+hT2ZeFS4dWkRW4n6GBL4nLP2X3WWlDo2hT6rLgT4WRaue x9jTmauxCw6fmxz9V/12dCwkef1c8gRczH1EzyYGvDjHb9YnU2Y3uh7ZT XH9J94AFrRtRrv7lgqZ8xE1BPZYnQODIYl23blMuVeQm8y/acawszqVxf S0+tv22+8FW0JVzluNXk7AM9WDQSihNQ64vDcN3KWP38P665KOwIsCWq8 g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: v+3DLbBBQx62uWENOd6BKQ== X-CSE-MsgGUID: rDwcmDPsTI+UaKwu6PgBFQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6800,10657,11867"; a="86560025" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.25,210,1779174000"; d="scan'208";a="86560025" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 07 Aug 2026 04:31:17 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: dMjH4ozgQteWn5ubhb2YxA== X-CSE-MsgGUID: F1RUzlTeRKah96UBG1rXPA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 Received: from black.igk.intel.com ([10.91.253.5]) by fmviesa003.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 07 Aug 2026 04:31:15 -0700 Received: by black.igk.intel.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id EFD8499; Fri, 07 Aug 2026 13:31:13 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 13:31:13 +0200 From: Mika Westerberg To: Dmitry Antipov Cc: Andreas Noever , Mika Westerberg , Yehezkel Bernat , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, lvc-project@linuxtesting.org, syzbot+901ca72278dfd89daf58@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] thunderbolt: verify PCI resource type and size in nhi_probe() Message-ID: <20260807113113.GO235112@black.igk.intel.com> References: <20260807083757.318371-1-dmantipov@yandex.ru> <20260807095831.GL235112@black.igk.intel.com> <7510bf11-7ae3-47dc-b499-5eb5e0aa0192@yandex.ru> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7510bf11-7ae3-47dc-b499-5eb5e0aa0192@yandex.ru> On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 02:13:06PM +0300, Dmitry Antipov wrote: > On 8/7/26 12:58 PM, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > > Yeah, I'm not entirely sure we want to start "fixing" issues like these > > where it's clearly not a USB4/TB NHI. IMHO If user forces the driver > > somehow to bind to this unrelated device then she/he got what asked for. > > I agree but isn't there a scenario to trigger such a weird probe just by mistake? Okay but how it is "mistake"? ;-) I'm actually not sure how this was even triggered. Something like you as root echo random PCI device name to "bind" files of a driver?