Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
From:   Kalle Valo <kvalo@kernel.org>
To:     =?utf-8?B?SsOpcsO0bWU=?= Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com>
Cc:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wfx: prevent underflow in wfx_send_pds()
References: <Yv8eX7Xv2ubUOvW7@kili> <2729343.a3EqFhE7eK@pc-42>
        <87a67ndokl.fsf@kernel.org> <37769865.10thIPus4b@pc-42>
Date:   Thu, 01 Sep 2022 13:33:15 +0300
In-Reply-To: <37769865.10thIPus4b@pc-42> (=?utf-8?B?IkrDqXLDtG1l?=
 Pouiller"'s message of "Mon,
        29 Aug 2022 19:12:40 +0200")
Message-ID: <87r10ve650.fsf@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com> writes:

> On Monday 29 August 2022 18:03:38 CEST Kalle Valo wrote:
>> J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com> writes:
>>=20
>> > On Friday 19 August 2022 07:23:43 CEST Dan Carpenter wrote:
>> >> This does a "chunk_len - 4" subtraction later when it calls:
>> >>
>> >>         ret =3D wfx_hif_configuration(wdev, buf + 4, chunk_len - 4);
>> >>
>> >> so check for "chunk_len" is less than 4.
>> >
>> > This patch also ensures that buf[4] won't overflow during:
>> >
>> >     if (buf[4] !=3D '{' || buf[chunk_len - 1] !=3D '}')
>> >       dev_warn(wdev->dev, "PDS:%d: unexpected content\n", chunk_num);
>> >
>> >> Fixes: dcbecb497908 ("staging: wfx: allow new PDS format")
>> >> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
>> >
>> > Reviewed-by: J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me Pouiller <jerome.pouiller@silabs.com>
>>=20
>> BTW J=C3=A9r=C3=B4me, as you are the driver maintainer you can use Acked=
-by.
>
> Reviewed-by does not imply Acked-by?

Acked-by has "stronger" meaning and is meant to use by the maintainer of
the code in question. So anyone can use Reviewed-by but only the
maintainer should use Acked-by. My preference is that maintainers use
Acked-by as then I can easily see from my patchwork script that the
patch is ready to be applied.

https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/submitting-patches.html#when=
-to-use-acked-by-cc-and-co-developed-by

--=20
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/list/

https://wireless.wiki.kernel.org/en/developers/documentation/submittingpatc=
hes