From: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Al Cooper <alcooperx@gmail.com>,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] USB: EHCI: Add alias for Broadcom INSNREG
Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 10:57:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210818145736.GD193695@rowland.harvard.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210818043035.1308062-3-keescook@chromium.org>
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 09:30:34PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> Refactor struct ehci_regs to avoid accessing beyond the end of
> port_status. This change results in no difference in the resulting
> object code.
>
> Avoids several warnings when building with -Warray-bounds:
>
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c: In function 'ehci_brcm_reset':
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c:113:32: warning: array subscript 16 is above array bounds of 'u32[15]' {aka 'unsigned int[15]'} [-Warray-bounds]
> 113 | ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00800040, &ehci->regs->port_status[0x10]);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> In file included from drivers/usb/host/ehci.h:274,
> from drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c:15:
> ./include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h:132:7: note: while referencing 'port_status'
> 132 | u32 port_status[HCS_N_PORTS_MAX];
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Note that the documentation around this proprietary register is
> confusing. If "USB_EHCI_INSNREG00" is at port_status[0x0f], its offset
> would be 0x80 (not 0x90). The code uses port_status[0x10], so is that
> not using "USB_EHCI_INSNREG00"?
I suspect the 0x90 value in the comment is a typo for 0x80.
> Perhaps port_status[0x10] is USB_EHCI_INSNREG01 and port_status[0x12]
> is USB_EHCI_INSNREG03? If so, the union could be adjusted to better
> represent the layout.
>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Al Cooper <alcooperx@gmail.com>
> Cc: Alan Stern <stern@rowland.harvard.edu>
> Cc: linux-usb@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com
> Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Fixes: 9df231511bd6 ("usb: ehci: Add new EHCI driver for Broadcom STB SoC's")
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
> drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c | 11 +++++------
> include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h | 16 ++++++++++++++--
> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c
> index 3e0ebe8cc649..5d232d3701f9 100644
> --- a/drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c
> +++ b/drivers/usb/host/ehci-brcm.c
> @@ -110,8 +110,8 @@ static int ehci_brcm_reset(struct usb_hcd *hcd)
> * bus usage
> * port_status[0x0f] = Broadcom-proprietary USB_EHCI_INSNREG00 @ 0x90
This last comment line is no longer necessary, thanks to the revised
port definitions. And since it is actively misleading, with the 0x90
instead of 0x80, I think it should be removed entirely.
> */
> - ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00800040, &ehci->regs->port_status[0x10]);
> - ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00000001, &ehci->regs->port_status[0x12]);
> + ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00800040, &ehci->regs->brcm_insnreg[0]);
> + ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00000001, &ehci->regs->brcm_insnreg[2]);
>
> return ehci_setup(hcd);
> }
> @@ -223,11 +223,10 @@ static int __maybe_unused ehci_brcm_resume(struct device *dev)
> /*
> * SWLINUX-1705: Avoid OUT packet underflows during high memory
> * bus usage
> - * port_status[0x0f] = Broadcom-proprietary USB_EHCI_INSNREG00
> - * @ 0x90
> + * port_status[0x0f] = Broadcom-proprietary USB_EHCI_INSNREG00 @ 0x90
Same here.
> */
> - ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00800040, &ehci->regs->port_status[0x10]);
> - ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00000001, &ehci->regs->port_status[0x12]);
> + ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00800040, &ehci->regs->brcm_insnreg[0]);
> + ehci_writel(ehci, 0x00000001, &ehci->regs->brcm_insnreg[2]);
>
> ehci_resume(hcd, false);
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h b/include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h
> index 5398f571113b..86f0909cab99 100644
> --- a/include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h
> +++ b/include/linux/usb/ehci_def.h
> @@ -182,11 +182,23 @@ struct ehci_regs {
> * its EHCI controller has both TT and LPM support. HOSTPCx are extensions to
> * PORTSCx
> */
> - /* HOSTPC: offset 0x84 */
> - u32 hostpc[HCS_N_PORTS_MAX];
> + union {
> + /* HOSTPC: offset 0x84 */
> + u32 hostpc[HCS_N_PORTS_MAX];
> #define HOSTPC_PHCD (1<<22) /* Phy clock disable */
> #define HOSTPC_PSPD (3<<25) /* Port speed detection */
>
> + /*
> + * This was originally documented as:
> + * "port_status[0x0f] = Broadcom-proprietary USB_EHCI_INSNREG00 @ 0x90"
> + * but this doesn't make sense: the code was using
> + * port_status[0x10]. port_status[0x0f] would be reserved4.
> + * Also, none of these are near 0x90. port_status[0x10] is
> + * offset 0x84, and port_status[0x0f] would be 0x80.
> + */
This comment is entirely inappropriate. It's the sort of thing that
belongs in the git history, not in the code.
> + u32 brcm_insnreg[3];
Given the notation in the original comments, perhaps it would be better
to define this as:
struct { /* Broadcom proprietary registers */
u32 brcm_insnreg01; /* offset 0x84 */
u32 brcm_insnreg02;
u32 brcm_insnreg03;
};
I don't know. It would be nice to hear from somebody at Broadcom.
Alan Stern
> + };
> +
> u32 reserved5[2];
>
> /* USBMODE_EX: offset 0xc8 */
> --
> 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-08-18 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-18 4:30 [PATCH 0/2] USB: EHCI: Add register array bounds to HCS ports Kees Cook
2021-08-18 4:30 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Kees Cook
2021-08-18 9:48 ` Andy Shevchenko
2021-08-18 15:02 ` Alan Stern
2021-08-18 14:44 ` Alan Stern
2021-08-18 17:17 ` Kees Cook
2021-08-18 4:30 ` [PATCH 2/2] USB: EHCI: Add alias for Broadcom INSNREG Kees Cook
2021-08-18 14:57 ` Alan Stern [this message]
2021-08-18 17:15 ` Kees Cook
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20210818145736.GD193695@rowland.harvard.edu \
--to=stern@rowland.harvard.edu \
--cc=alcooperx@gmail.com \
--cc=andy.shevchenko@gmail.com \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com \
--cc=f.fainelli@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).