2023-07-05 00:33:58

by Yu Hao

Subject: [PATCH] ethernet: e1000e: Fix possible uninit bug

The variable phy_data should be initialized in function e1e_rphy.
However, there is not return value check, which means there is a
possible uninit read later for the variable.

Signed-off-by: Yu Hao <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
index 771a3c909c45..455af5e55cc6 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
@@ -6910,8 +6910,11 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
/* report the system wakeup cause from S3/S4 */
if (adapter->flags2 & FLAG2_HAS_PHY_WAKEUP) {
u16 phy_data;
+ s32 ret_val;

- e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
+ ret_val = e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
+ if (ret_val)
+ return ret_val;
if (phy_data) {
e_info("PHY Wakeup cause - %s\n",
phy_data & E1000_WUS_EX ? "Unicast Packet" :
--
2.34.1

2023-07-05 15:53:39

by Sasha Neftin

Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] ethernet: e1000e: Fix possible uninit bug

On 7/5/2023 03:10, Yu Hao wrote:
> The variable phy_data should be initialized in function e1e_rphy.
> However, there is not return value check, which means there is a
> possible uninit read later for the variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Hao <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> index 771a3c909c45..455af5e55cc6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> @@ -6910,8 +6910,11 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> /* report the system wakeup cause from S3/S4 */
> if (adapter->flags2 & FLAG2_HAS_PHY_WAKEUP) {
> u16 phy_data;
> + s32 ret_val;

why just not initialize u16 phy_data = 0? How did it hurt us? (legacy)

>
> - e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> + ret_val = e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> + if (ret_val)
> + return ret_val;
> if (phy_data) {
> e_info("PHY Wakeup cause - %s\n",
> phy_data & E1000_WUS_EX ? "Unicast Packet" :

2023-07-10 01:37:51

by Yu Hao

Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] ethernet: e1000e: Fix possible uninit bug

I think u16 phy_data = 0 would not hurt us.
Let me submit a patch which just initializes u16 phy_data = 0.

Yu Hao

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 8:47 AM Neftin, Sasha <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 7/5/2023 03:10, Yu Hao wrote:
> > The variable phy_data should be initialized in function e1e_rphy.
> > However, there is not return value check, which means there is a
> > possible uninit read later for the variable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Yu Hao <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 ++++-
> > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > index 771a3c909c45..455af5e55cc6 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> > @@ -6910,8 +6910,11 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> > /* report the system wakeup cause from S3/S4 */
> > if (adapter->flags2 & FLAG2_HAS_PHY_WAKEUP) {
> > u16 phy_data;
> > + s32 ret_val;
>
> why just not initialize u16 phy_data = 0? How did it hurt us? (legacy)
>
> >
> > - e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> > + ret_val = e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> > + if (ret_val)
> > + return ret_val;
> > if (phy_data) {
> > e_info("PHY Wakeup cause - %s\n",
> > phy_data & E1000_WUS_EX ? "Unicast Packet" :
>

2023-07-10 08:09:40

by Sasha Neftin

Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] ethernet: e1000e: Fix possible uninit bug

On 7/10/2023 03:55, Yu Hao wrote:
> I think u16 phy_data = 0 would not hurt us.
> Let me submit a patch which just initializes u16 phy_data = 0.
Good.
>
> Yu Hao
>
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 8:47 AM Neftin, Sasha <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On 7/5/2023 03:10, Yu Hao wrote:
>>> The variable phy_data should be initialized in function e1e_rphy.
>>> However, there is not return value check, which means there is a
>>> possible uninit read later for the variable.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Yu Hao <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 ++++-
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
>>> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
>>> index 771a3c909c45..455af5e55cc6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
>>> @@ -6910,8 +6910,11 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
>>> /* report the system wakeup cause from S3/S4 */
>>> if (adapter->flags2 & FLAG2_HAS_PHY_WAKEUP) {
>>> u16 phy_data;
>>> + s32 ret_val;
>>
>> why just not initialize u16 phy_data = 0? How did it hurt us? (legacy)
>>
>>>
>>> - e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
>>> + ret_val = e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
>>> + if (ret_val)
>>> + return ret_val;
>>> if (phy_data) {
>>> e_info("PHY Wakeup cause - %s\n",
>>> phy_data & E1000_WUS_EX ? "Unicast Packet" :
>>

2023-07-10 08:36:37

by Denis Kirjanov

Subject: Re: [PATCH] ethernet: e1000e: Fix possible uninit bug

On 7/5/23 03:10, Yu Hao wrote:
> The variable phy_data should be initialized in function e1e_rphy.
> However, there is not return value check, which means there is a
> possible uninit read later for the variable.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yu Hao <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 5 ++++-
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> index 771a3c909c45..455af5e55cc6 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
> @@ -6910,8 +6910,11 @@ static int __e1000_resume(struct pci_dev *pdev)
> /* report the system wakeup cause from S3/S4 */
> if (adapter->flags2 & FLAG2_HAS_PHY_WAKEUP) {
> u16 phy_data;
> + s32 ret_val;
>
> - e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> + ret_val = e1e_rphy(&adapter->hw, BM_WUS, &phy_data);
> + if (ret_val)
> + return ret_val;
> if (phy_data) {
> e_info("PHY Wakeup cause - %s\n",
> phy_data & E1000_WUS_EX ? "Unicast Packet" :

the same case appears in other places in the driver like e1000_setup_rctl()