From: 谢泓宇 <xiehongyu1@kylinos.cn>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: Hongyu Xie <xy521521@gmail.com>,
mathias.nyman@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-usb@vger.kernel.org, 125707942@qq.com,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] xhci: fix two places when dealing with return value of function xhci_check_args
Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 11:48:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ce40f4cd-a110-80b1-f766-e94dd8cedc7e@kylinos.cn> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7af5b318-b1ac-0c74-1782-04ba50a3b5fa@linux.intel.com>
Hi Mathias,
On 2022/1/27 17:43, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 26.1.2022 14.49, Hongyu Xie wrote:
>
>>> Anyway, why is this unique to this one driver? Why does it not show up
>>> for any other driver?
>> The whole thing is not about a particular driver. The thing is xhci_urb_enqueue shouldn't change the return value of xhci_check_args from -ENODEV to -EINVAL. Many other drivers only check if the return value of xchi_check_args is <= 0.
> Agree, lets return -ENODEV when appropriate.
>
>>>> The whole point is, if xhci_check_args returns value A, xhci_urb_enqueque
>>>> shouldn't return any
>>>> other value, because that will change some driver's behavior(like r8152.c).
>>> But you are changing how the code currently works. Are you sure you
>>> want to have this "succeed" if this is on a root hub?
>> Yes, I'm changing how the code currently works but not on a root hub.
>>>> 2."So if 0 is returned, you will now return that here, is that ok?
>>>> That is a change in functionality.
>>>> But this can only ever be the case for a root hub, is that ok?"
>>>>
>>>> It's the same logic, but now xhci_urb_enqueue can return -ENODEV if xHC is
>>>> halted.
>>>> If it happens on a root hub, xhci_urb_enqueue won't be called.
>>>>
>>>> 3."Again, this means all is good? Why is this being called for a root hub?"
>>>>
>>>> It is the same logic with the old one, but now xhci_check_streams_endpoint
>>>> can return -ENODEV if xHC is halted.
>>> This still feels wrong to me, but I'll let the maintainer decide, as I
>>> don't understand why a root hub is special here.
>> Thanks please. usb_submit_urb will call usb_hcd_submit_urb. And usb_hcd_submit_urb will call rh_urb_enqueue if it's on a root hub instead of calling hcd->driver->urb_enqueue(which is xhci_urb_enqueue in this case).
> xhci_urb_enqueue() shouldn't be called for roothub urbs, but if it is then we
> should continue to return -EINVAL
xhci_urb_enqueue() won't be called for roothub urbs, only for none
roothub urbs(see usb_hcd_submit_urb()).
So xhci_urb_enqueue() will not get 0 from xhci_check_args().
Still return -EINVAL if xhci_check_args() returns 0 in xhci_urb_enqueue()?
>
> xhci_check_args() should be rewritten later, but first we want a targeted fix
> that can go to stable.
>
> Your original patch would be ok after following modification:
> if (ret <= 0)
> return ret ? ret : -EINVAL;
I have two questions:
1) Why return -EINVAL for roothub urbs?
2) Should I change all the return statements about
xhci_check_args() in drivers/usb/host/xhci.c?
There are 6 of them.
>
> Thanks
> -Mathias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-28 3:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-26 9:41 [PATCH -next] xhci: fix two places when dealing with return value of function xhci_check_args Hongyu Xie
2022-01-26 9:49 ` Greg KH
2022-01-26 10:22 ` 谢泓宇
2022-01-26 10:50 ` Greg KH
2022-01-26 12:49 ` Hongyu Xie
2022-01-27 9:43 ` Mathias Nyman
2022-01-28 3:48 ` 谢泓宇 [this message]
2022-01-28 9:48 ` Mathias Nyman
2022-02-09 2:47 ` 谢泓宇
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-01-26 8:56 Hongyu Xie
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=ce40f4cd-a110-80b1-f766-e94dd8cedc7e@kylinos.cn \
--to=xiehongyu1@kylinos.cn \
--cc=125707942@qq.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-usb@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathias.nyman@intel.com \
--cc=mathias.nyman@linux.intel.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=xy521521@gmail.com \
/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).