From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 732FFC433E0 for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 11:25:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAF616198F for ; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 11:25:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235115AbhCaLXT (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:23:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33868 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234987AbhCaLXO (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2021 07:23:14 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com (mail-wm1-x32c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 84284C061574; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 04:23:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id b2-20020a7bc2420000b029010be1081172so966931wmj.1; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 04:23:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RRmAqh4LFPikloAYlKI1ZJUSv+UwDdN6QqlklA5k02E=; b=klD1crcg/d6wpdPKSGJftJ6MU73ROiZhr5z+6F0v1nPdzZutjKpVslUbhVs2F39wf/ MQ7TWXMFQlZOB2rGY/mpkaEEdTh+fo/WdFqZ/c+WDYh4QohdCgEpVBslMWQm/cdt+Jhg rAXzZy4lF3BDEIB33e671+kQw6rJfOaOkCF3gtkuhuzACaDXmOKb58AkGwy2dZ1EDAC+ 9T9z5uDulq8T+JfA+HtlIlHdDmvxGkm2xVYLgpN+1lFTlku+1Knw+SKMGmouQvENT78k 0SoL9RjVqZUbSjUcH/5+QdBBAq5QxHmerW4RcfbEO7EBSR+P6vYXMewmfb8zPn5KXk/q wcVA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:date:in-reply-to :references:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=RRmAqh4LFPikloAYlKI1ZJUSv+UwDdN6QqlklA5k02E=; b=HXx0fov1BsQlktNDwU4cTuR25tsgLp7zWblYgMzLVHGEE5NXiRGJTeFdokuAJKwxGC GE87L+oX2am89ScWhTnhCQNudMHpFfjJiOUUpQgO543hIfuZDeEFGMVZJzutcIUT6s1I Nc47X6fL0z5nKPHLjaNlHAjXExvJiwR+Hl6mSVe6NiSpz/uRKH2gGi+G9T93dkR8tvVe xrPz+q+pB4Wzs+Z2WWgtO0LVF3DsiP6LBTd5ytNa9D9Hj3xT2eBxIBQDdJ1Al1l1jpMI 2tV+uYZ7NN31CAqlOTmWDHfqdejAShbf3sS26MOTSUL8kC4i6VFbmHfjWI7R1KULBpvt Bgsw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530BvXkP0hKjXGlZn6Vb0wkg5lTjBVWNzcgIGvZSp10cxiz6brTx YJ4sS+2a7VWUmXXT4gB4qKY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyKBZ0CremFIugIfEnK8kCB9DNn2JSkm2NEQmqoSXiZftwrEk8j7x7Yxxv7QFU2iyxRVkESFw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:35c1:: with SMTP id r1mr2739630wmq.143.1617189793338; Wed, 31 Mar 2021 04:23:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 192.168.10.5 ([39.46.7.73]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r206sm3569252wma.46.2021.03.31.04.23.10 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 31 Mar 2021 04:23:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <65e6931b2a15e4685eb0c3b7873a197ba025d50d.camel@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] usbip: vhci_hcd: do proper error handling From: Muhammad Usama Anjum To: Shuah Khan , shuah@kernel.org, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, valentina.manea.m@gmail.com, stern@rowland.harvard.edu Cc: musamaanjum@gmail.com Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2021 16:23:07 +0500 In-Reply-To: References: <20210325114638.GA659438@LEGION> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.4-0ubuntu1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2021-03-26 at 14:24 -0600, Shuah Khan wrote: > On 3/25/21 5:46 AM, Muhammad Usama Anjum wrote: > > The driver was assuming that all the parameters would be valid. But it > > is possible that parameters are sent from userspace. For those cases, > > appropriate error checks have been added. > > > > Are you sure this change is necessary for vhci_hcd? Is there a > scenario where vhci_hcd will receive these values from userspace? I'm not sure if these changes are necessary for vhci_hcd. I'd sent this patch following the motivation of a patch (c318840fb2) from dummy_hcd to handle some cases. Yeah, there is scenario where vhci_hcd will receive these values from userspace. For example, typReq = SetPortFeature and wValue = USB_PORT_FEAT_C_CONNECTION can be received from userspace. As USB_PORT_FEAT_C_CONNECTION case isn't being handled, default case will is executed for it. So I'm assuming USB_PORT_FEAT_C_CONNECTION isn't supported and default case shouldn't be executed. > Is there a way to reproduce the problem? I'm not able to reproduce any problem. But typReq = SetPortFeature and wValue = USB_PORT_FEAT_C_CONNECTION may trigger some behavior which isn't intended as USB_PORT_FEAT_C_CONNECTION may not be supported for vhci_hcd. > thanks, > -- Shuah There is one line wrong in this patch. If we decide to proceed, I'll send a v2. Please let me know your thoughts. Thanks, Usama