All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid
@ 2022-07-08  8:08 Dan Carpenter
  2022-07-08  8:31 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-07-08  8:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: srinivas.kandagatla; +Cc: alsa-devel

Hello Srinivas Kandagatla,

The patch aa1262ca6695: "soundwire: qcom: Check device status before
reading devid" from Jul 6, 2022, leads to the following Smatch static
checker warning:

	drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:484 qcom_swrm_enumerate()
	error: buffer overflow 'ctrl->status' 11 <= 11

drivers/soundwire/qcom.c
    471 static int qcom_swrm_enumerate(struct sdw_bus *bus)
    472 {
    473         struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *ctrl = to_qcom_sdw(bus);
    474         struct sdw_slave *slave, *_s;
    475         struct sdw_slave_id id;
    476         u32 val1, val2;
    477         bool found;
    478         u64 addr;
    479         int i;
    480         char *buf1 = (char *)&val1, *buf2 = (char *)&val2;
    481 
    482         for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {
                     ^^^^^
This a loop that starts from 1 instead of 0.  I looked at the
surrounding context and it seems like it should be a normal loop that
starts at 0 and goes to < SDW_MAX_DEVICES.

(Or possibly the other loops are buggy as well).

    483                 /* do not continue if the status is Not Present  */
--> 484                 if (!ctrl->status[i])

So this is off by one and reads one element beyond the end of the loop.

    485                         continue;
    486 
    487                 /*SCP_Devid5 - Devid 4*/
    488                 ctrl->reg_read(ctrl, SWRM_ENUMERATOR_SLAVE_DEV_ID_1(i), &val1);
    489 
    490                 /*SCP_Devid3 - DevId 2 Devid 1 Devid 0*/
    491                 ctrl->reg_read(ctrl, SWRM_ENUMERATOR_SLAVE_DEV_ID_2(i), &val2);
    492 
    493                 if (!val1 && !val2)
    494                         break;
    495 
    496                 addr = buf2[1] | (buf2[0] << 8) | (buf1[3] << 16) |
    497                         ((u64)buf1[2] << 24) | ((u64)buf1[1] << 32) |
    498                         ((u64)buf1[0] << 40);
    499 
    500                 sdw_extract_slave_id(bus, addr, &id);
    501                 found = false;
    502                 /* Now compare with entries */
    503                 list_for_each_entry_safe(slave, _s, &bus->slaves, node) {
    504                         if (sdw_compare_devid(slave, id) == 0) {
    505                                 qcom_swrm_set_slave_dev_num(bus, slave, i);
    506                                 found = true;
    507                                 break;
    508                         }
    509                 }
    510 
    511                 if (!found) {
    512                         qcom_swrm_set_slave_dev_num(bus, NULL, i);
    513                         sdw_slave_add(bus, &id, NULL);
    514                 }
    515         }
    516 
    517         complete(&ctrl->enumeration);
    518         return 0;
    519 }

regards,
dan carpenter

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid
  2022-07-08  8:08 [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid Dan Carpenter
@ 2022-07-08  8:31 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
  2022-07-08  8:45   ` Dan Carpenter
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Srinivas Kandagatla @ 2022-07-08  8:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Carpenter; +Cc: alsa-devel

Hi Dan,

On 08/07/2022 09:08, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> Hello Srinivas Kandagatla,
> 
> The patch aa1262ca6695: "soundwire: qcom: Check device status before
> reading devid" from Jul 6, 2022, leads to the following Smatch static
> checker warning:
> 
> 	drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:484 qcom_swrm_enumerate()
> 	error: buffer overflow 'ctrl->status' 11 <= 11
> 
> drivers/soundwire/qcom.c
>      471 static int qcom_swrm_enumerate(struct sdw_bus *bus)
>      472 {
>      473         struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *ctrl = to_qcom_sdw(bus);
>      474         struct sdw_slave *slave, *_s;
>      475         struct sdw_slave_id id;
>      476         u32 val1, val2;
>      477         bool found;
>      478         u64 addr;
>      479         int i;
>      480         char *buf1 = (char *)&val1, *buf2 = (char *)&val2;
>      481
>      482         for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {
>                       ^^^^^
> This a loop that starts from 1 instead of 0.  I looked at the
> surrounding context and it seems like it should be a normal loop that
> starts at 0 and goes to < SDW_MAX_DEVICES.
> 

In SoundWire world device id 0 is special one and used for enumerating 
the SoundWire devices.

Only addresses from 1-11 are valid devids that can be assigned to 
devices by the host/controller.

This part of the code is reading the devids assigned by the hw 
auto-enumeration, So the loop start from 1 is correct here.


> (Or possibly the other loops are buggy as well).

Atleast this code is fine, but I see other places where are starting 
from 0 which could be fixed but the SoundWire core will ignore the 
status for devid 0.

--srini
> 
>      483                 /* do not continue if the status is Not Present  */
> --> 484                 if (!ctrl->status[i])
> 
> So this is off by one and reads one element beyond the end of the loop.
> 
>      485                         continue;
>      486
>      487                 /*SCP_Devid5 - Devid 4*/
>      488                 ctrl->reg_read(ctrl, SWRM_ENUMERATOR_SLAVE_DEV_ID_1(i), &val1);
>      489
>      490                 /*SCP_Devid3 - DevId 2 Devid 1 Devid 0*/
>      491                 ctrl->reg_read(ctrl, SWRM_ENUMERATOR_SLAVE_DEV_ID_2(i), &val2);
>      492
>      493                 if (!val1 && !val2)
>      494                         break;
>      495
>      496                 addr = buf2[1] | (buf2[0] << 8) | (buf1[3] << 16) |
>      497                         ((u64)buf1[2] << 24) | ((u64)buf1[1] << 32) |
>      498                         ((u64)buf1[0] << 40);
>      499
>      500                 sdw_extract_slave_id(bus, addr, &id);
>      501                 found = false;
>      502                 /* Now compare with entries */
>      503                 list_for_each_entry_safe(slave, _s, &bus->slaves, node) {
>      504                         if (sdw_compare_devid(slave, id) == 0) {
>      505                                 qcom_swrm_set_slave_dev_num(bus, slave, i);
>      506                                 found = true;
>      507                                 break;
>      508                         }
>      509                 }
>      510
>      511                 if (!found) {
>      512                         qcom_swrm_set_slave_dev_num(bus, NULL, i);
>      513                         sdw_slave_add(bus, &id, NULL);
>      514                 }
>      515         }
>      516
>      517         complete(&ctrl->enumeration);
>      518         return 0;
>      519 }
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid
  2022-07-08  8:31 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
@ 2022-07-08  8:45   ` Dan Carpenter
  2022-07-08  9:02     ` Srinivas Kandagatla
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Dan Carpenter @ 2022-07-08  8:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Srinivas Kandagatla; +Cc: alsa-devel

On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:31:31AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> 
> On 08/07/2022 09:08, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> > Hello Srinivas Kandagatla,
> > 
> > The patch aa1262ca6695: "soundwire: qcom: Check device status before
> > reading devid" from Jul 6, 2022, leads to the following Smatch static
> > checker warning:
> > 
> > 	drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:484 qcom_swrm_enumerate()
> > 	error: buffer overflow 'ctrl->status' 11 <= 11
> > 
> > drivers/soundwire/qcom.c
> >      471 static int qcom_swrm_enumerate(struct sdw_bus *bus)
> >      472 {
> >      473         struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *ctrl = to_qcom_sdw(bus);
> >      474         struct sdw_slave *slave, *_s;
> >      475         struct sdw_slave_id id;
> >      476         u32 val1, val2;
> >      477         bool found;
> >      478         u64 addr;
> >      479         int i;
> >      480         char *buf1 = (char *)&val1, *buf2 = (char *)&val2;
> >      481
> >      482         for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {
> >                       ^^^^^
> > This a loop that starts from 1 instead of 0.  I looked at the
> > surrounding context and it seems like it should be a normal loop that
> > starts at 0 and goes to < SDW_MAX_DEVICES.
> > 
> 
> In SoundWire world device id 0 is special one and used for enumerating the
> SoundWire devices.
> 
> Only addresses from 1-11 are valid devids that can be assigned to devices by
> the host/controller.
> 
> This part of the code is reading the devids assigned by the hw
> auto-enumeration, So the loop start from 1 is correct here.
> 
> 
> > (Or possibly the other loops are buggy as well).
> 
> Atleast this code is fine, but I see other places where are starting from 0
> which could be fixed but the SoundWire core will ignore the status for devid
> 0.

This code is *not* fine either because it should be < instead of <=.

It might be that we always hit a zero first and break so the bug might
not affect users but it's still wrong.

regards,
dan carpenter


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid
  2022-07-08  8:45   ` Dan Carpenter
@ 2022-07-08  9:02     ` Srinivas Kandagatla
  2022-07-08 14:04       ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Srinivas Kandagatla @ 2022-07-08  9:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Dan Carpenter; +Cc: alsa-devel



On 08/07/2022 09:45, Dan Carpenter wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:31:31AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>> Hi Dan,
>>
>> On 08/07/2022 09:08, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>> Hello Srinivas Kandagatla,
>>>
>>> The patch aa1262ca6695: "soundwire: qcom: Check device status before
>>> reading devid" from Jul 6, 2022, leads to the following Smatch static
>>> checker warning:
>>>
>>> 	drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:484 qcom_swrm_enumerate()
>>> 	error: buffer overflow 'ctrl->status' 11 <= 11
>>>
>>> drivers/soundwire/qcom.c
>>>       471 static int qcom_swrm_enumerate(struct sdw_bus *bus)
>>>       472 {
>>>       473         struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *ctrl = to_qcom_sdw(bus);
>>>       474         struct sdw_slave *slave, *_s;
>>>       475         struct sdw_slave_id id;
>>>       476         u32 val1, val2;
>>>       477         bool found;
>>>       478         u64 addr;
>>>       479         int i;
>>>       480         char *buf1 = (char *)&val1, *buf2 = (char *)&val2;
>>>       481
>>>       482         for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {
>>>                        ^^^^^
>>> This a loop that starts from 1 instead of 0.  I looked at the
>>> surrounding context and it seems like it should be a normal loop that
>>> starts at 0 and goes to < SDW_MAX_DEVICES.
>>>
>>
>> In SoundWire world device id 0 is special one and used for enumerating the
>> SoundWire devices.
>>
>> Only addresses from 1-11 are valid devids that can be assigned to devices by
>> the host/controller.
>>
>> This part of the code is reading the devids assigned by the hw
>> auto-enumeration, So the loop start from 1 is correct here.
>>
>>
>>> (Or possibly the other loops are buggy as well).
>>
>> Atleast this code is fine, but I see other places where are starting from 0
>> which could be fixed but the SoundWire core will ignore the status for devid
>> 0.
> 
> This code is *not* fine either because it should be < instead of <=.
> 
> It might be that we always hit a zero first and break so the bug might
> not affect users but it's still wrong.

I agree, Let me send a fix or send a v2.

--srini
> 
> regards,
> dan carpenter
> 

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid
  2022-07-08  9:02     ` Srinivas Kandagatla
@ 2022-07-08 14:04       ` Pierre-Louis Bossart
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Pierre-Louis Bossart @ 2022-07-08 14:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Srinivas Kandagatla, Dan Carpenter; +Cc: alsa-devel, Vinod Koul



On 7/8/22 04:02, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> 
> 
> On 08/07/2022 09:45, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 09:31:31AM +0100, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
>>> Hi Dan,
>>>
>>> On 08/07/2022 09:08, Dan Carpenter wrote:
>>>> Hello Srinivas Kandagatla,
>>>>
>>>> The patch aa1262ca6695: "soundwire: qcom: Check device status before
>>>> reading devid" from Jul 6, 2022, leads to the following Smatch static
>>>> checker warning:
>>>>
>>>>     drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:484 qcom_swrm_enumerate()
>>>>     error: buffer overflow 'ctrl->status' 11 <= 11
>>>>
>>>> drivers/soundwire/qcom.c
>>>>       471 static int qcom_swrm_enumerate(struct sdw_bus *bus)
>>>>       472 {
>>>>       473         struct qcom_swrm_ctrl *ctrl = to_qcom_sdw(bus);
>>>>       474         struct sdw_slave *slave, *_s;
>>>>       475         struct sdw_slave_id id;
>>>>       476         u32 val1, val2;
>>>>       477         bool found;
>>>>       478         u64 addr;
>>>>       479         int i;
>>>>       480         char *buf1 = (char *)&val1, *buf2 = (char *)&val2;
>>>>       481
>>>>       482         for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {
>>>>                        ^^^^^
>>>> This a loop that starts from 1 instead of 0.  I looked at the
>>>> surrounding context and it seems like it should be a normal loop that
>>>> starts at 0 and goes to < SDW_MAX_DEVICES.
>>>>
>>>
>>> In SoundWire world device id 0 is special one and used for
>>> enumerating the
>>> SoundWire devices.
>>>
>>> Only addresses from 1-11 are valid devids that can be assigned to
>>> devices by
>>> the host/controller.
>>>
>>> This part of the code is reading the devids assigned by the hw
>>> auto-enumeration, So the loop start from 1 is correct here.
>>>
>>>
>>>> (Or possibly the other loops are buggy as well).
>>>
>>> Atleast this code is fine, but I see other places where are starting
>>> from 0
>>> which could be fixed but the SoundWire core will ignore the status
>>> for devid
>>> 0.
>>
>> This code is *not* fine either because it should be < instead of <=.
>>
>> It might be that we always hit a zero first and break so the bug might
>> not affect users but it's still wrong.
> 
> I agree, Let me send a fix or send a v2.


the <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES is perfectly fine, provided that the allocation
is done correctly.

include/linux/soundwire/sdw.h:#define SDW_MAX_DEVICES                   11


drivers/soundwire/bus.c:        for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {

drivers/soundwire/bus.c:        for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {

drivers/soundwire/bus.c:        for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {


drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c:     for (i = 0; i <=
SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {

the start at zero is intentional here.
drivers/soundwire/cadence_master.c:     enum sdw_slave_status
status[SDW_MAX_DEVICES + 1];



drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:       for (dev_num = 0; dev_num <
SDW_MAX_DEVICES; dev_num++) {


This one is a bug! device 11 is not handled

drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:       for (i = 0; i < SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {


This one is a bug! device 11 is not handled

drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:       for (i = 1; i <= SDW_MAX_DEVICES; i++) {

This one has a bug! off-by-one access

drivers/soundwire/qcom.c:       enum sdw_slave_status
status[SDW_MAX_DEVICES];

Shoud be [SDW_MAX_DEVICES + 1]

The spec defines valid devices in the range 1..11 included.
Device0 is reserved for enumeration
Devices 12 and 13 are for groups
Device 14 is reserved for manager addressing
Device 15 is an 'all devices' alias.




^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-07-08 14:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-07-08  8:08 [bug report] soundwire: qcom: Check device status before reading devid Dan Carpenter
2022-07-08  8:31 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-07-08  8:45   ` Dan Carpenter
2022-07-08  9:02     ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2022-07-08 14:04       ` Pierre-Louis Bossart

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.