Re: [PATCH net 3/4] net: ipa: use the right accessor in ipa_endpoint_status_skip()

[Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>]

On 2/1/21 6:02 PM, Amy Parker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 3:32 PM Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org> wrote:
>>
>> When extracting the destination endpoint ID from the status in
>> ipa_endpoint_status_skip(), u32_get_bits() is used.  This happens to
>> work, but it's wrong: the structure field is only 8 bits wide
>> instead of 32.
>>
>> Fix this by using u8_get_bits() to get the destination endpoint ID.
> 
> Isn't

(I saw your second message.)

>> Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <elder@linaro.org>
>> ---
>>   drivers/net/ipa/ipa_endpoint.c | 4 ++--
>>   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ipa/ipa_endpoint.c b/drivers/net/ipa/ipa_endpoint.c
>> index 448d89da1e456..612afece303f3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/net/ipa/ipa_endpoint.c
>> +++ b/drivers/net/ipa/ipa_endpoint.c
>> @@ -1164,8 +1164,8 @@ static bool ipa_endpoint_status_skip(struct ipa_endpoint *endpoint,
>>                  return true;
> 
> A few lines above this, endpoint_id is initialized as u32. If we're
> going for "correctness", endpoint_id should be a u8. But of course,
> this would contrast with ipa_endpoint having it as a u32.

You are correct, endpoint_id is *defined* as type u32.

But the issue here is that the field status->endp_dst_idx
has type u8.  u32_get_bits() assumes the field it is
passed has type u32; while u8_get_bits() takes a u8.

The return value of u8_get_bits() is u8, as you might
suspect.  The C standard guarantees that the u8 value
will be promoted to the u32 target type here.

>>          if (!status->pkt_len)
>>                  return true;
>> -       endpoint_id = u32_get_bits(status->endp_dst_idx,
>> -                                  IPA_STATUS_DST_IDX_FMASK);
>> +       endpoint_id = u8_get_bits(status->endp_dst_idx,
>> +                                 IPA_STATUS_DST_IDX_FMASK);
>>          if (endpoint_id != endpoint->endpoint_id)
>>                  return true;
>>
>> --
>> 2.27.0
>>
> 
> As far as I see it, using u32_get_bits instead of u8_get_bits simply
> eliminates confusion about the type of endpoint_id. Perhaps instead of
> this patch, send a patch with a comment that while u32_get_bits is
> used, the field is only 8 bits?

No.  We really want to extract a sub-field from the u8
value passed to u8_get_bits() (not u32_get_bits()).

Does that make sense?

					-Alex


> Best regards,
> Amy Parker
> (she/her/hers)
>