Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20210421130105.1226686-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> <20210421130105.1226686-75-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20210421130105.1226686-75-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
From:   Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
Date:   Wed, 21 Apr 2021 19:51:49 +0200
Message-ID: <CAKMK7uF6sWeKX0DAaXoT9=xkD9eAAjHtkE0gn+v9YxmYAd3vdg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 074/190] Revert "drm/gma500: fix memory disclosures due to
 uninitialized bytes"
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Kangjie Lu <kjlu@umn.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 3:06 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> This reverts commit ec3b7b6eb8c90b52f61adff11b6db7a8db34de19.
>
> Commits from @umn.edu addresses have been found to be submitted in "bad
> faith" to try to test the kernel community's ability to review "known
> malicious" changes.  The result of these submissions can be found in a
> paper published at the 42nd IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy
> entitled, "Open Source Insecurity: Stealthily Introducing
> Vulnerabilities via Hypocrite Commits" written by Qiushi Wu (University
> of Minnesota) and Kangjie Lu (University of Minnesota).
>
> Because of this, all submissions from this group must be reverted from
> the kernel tree and will need to be re-reviewed again to determine if
> they actually are a valid fix.  Until that work is complete, remove this
> change to ensure that no problems are being introduced into the
> codebase.
>
> Cc: Kangjie Lu <kjlu@umn.edu>
> Cc: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>
> Cc: https
> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

Acked-by: Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter@ffwll.ch>

gma500 is dead enough I'm not going to spend a single cycle thinking
whether this fixes anything or not and hence whether the revert is ok
or not.
-Daniel

> ---
>  drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/oaktrail_crtc.c | 2 --
>  1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/oaktrail_crtc.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/oaktrail_crtc.c
> index 129f87971002..f74041a102d9 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/oaktrail_crtc.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/gma500/oaktrail_crtc.c
> @@ -129,7 +129,6 @@ static bool mrst_sdvo_find_best_pll(const struct gma_limit_t *limit,
>         s32 freq_error, min_error = 100000;
>
>         memset(best_clock, 0, sizeof(*best_clock));
> -       memset(&clock, 0, sizeof(clock));
>
>         for (clock.m = limit->m.min; clock.m <= limit->m.max; clock.m++) {
>                 for (clock.n = limit->n.min; clock.n <= limit->n.max;
> @@ -186,7 +185,6 @@ static bool mrst_lvds_find_best_pll(const struct gma_limit_t *limit,
>         int err = target;
>
>         memset(best_clock, 0, sizeof(*best_clock));
> -       memset(&clock, 0, sizeof(clock));
>
>         for (clock.m = limit->m.min; clock.m <= limit->m.max; clock.m++) {
>                 for (clock.p1 = limit->p1.min; clock.p1 <= limit->p1.max;
> --
> 2.31.1
>


--
Daniel Vetter
Software Engineer, Intel Corporation
http://blog.ffwll.ch