[v2] Media: fix several issues on drivers

[PATCH v2 04/13] media: dvb_frontend: don't play tricks with underflow values

Posted by Mauro Carvalho Chehab 1 year, 3 months ago

fepriv->auto_sub_step is unsigned. Setting it to -1 is just a
trick to avoid calling continue, as reported by Coverity.

It relies to have this code just afterwards:

	if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;

Simplify the code by simply setting it to zero and use
continue to return to the while loop.

Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
---
 drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
index d48f48fda87c..c9283100332a 100644
--- a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
+++ b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
@@ -443,8 +443,8 @@ static int dvb_frontend_swzigzag_autotune(struct dvb_frontend *fe, int check_wra
 
 		default:
 			fepriv->auto_step++;
-			fepriv->auto_sub_step = -1; /* it'll be incremented to 0 in a moment */
-			break;
+			fepriv->auto_sub_step = 0;
+			continue;
 		}
 
 		if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
-- 
2.47.0

Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] media: dvb_frontend: don't play tricks with underflow values

Posted by Philipp Stanner 1 year, 3 months ago

On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 07:53 +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> fepriv->auto_sub_step is unsigned. Setting it to -1 is just a
> trick to avoid calling continue, as reported by Coverity.
> 
> It relies to have this code just afterwards:
> 
> 	if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
> 
> Simplify the code by simply setting it to zero and use
> continue to return to the while loop.
> 
> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")

Oh wow, back to the big-bang-commit ^^'

So is this a bug or not? It seems to me that the uint underflows to
UINT_MAX, and then wrapps around to 0 again through the ++..

I take the liberty of ++CCing Kees, since I heard him talk a lot about
overflowing on Plumbers.

If it's not a bug, I would not use "Fixes". If it is a bug, it should
be backported to stable, agreed?

Plus, is there a report-link somewhere by Coverty that could be linked
with "Closes: "?

> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>

Anyways, this in my eyes does what it's intended to do:

Reviewed-by: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com>

> ---
>  drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> index d48f48fda87c..c9283100332a 100644
> --- a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> +++ b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> @@ -443,8 +443,8 @@ static int dvb_frontend_swzigzag_autotune(struct
> dvb_frontend *fe, int check_wra
>  
>  		default:
>  			fepriv->auto_step++;
> -			fepriv->auto_sub_step = -1; /* it'll be
> incremented to 0 in a moment */
> -			break;
> +			fepriv->auto_sub_step = 0;
> +			continue;
>  		}
>  
>  		if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;

Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] media: dvb_frontend: don't play tricks with underflow values

Posted by Kees Cook 1 year, 3 months ago


On October 18, 2024 4:44:20 AM PDT, Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 07:53 +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>> fepriv->auto_sub_step is unsigned. Setting it to -1 is just a
>> trick to avoid calling continue, as reported by Coverity.
>> 
>> It relies to have this code just afterwards:
>> 
>> 	if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
>> 
>> Simplify the code by simply setting it to zero and use
>> continue to return to the while loop.
>> 
>> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
>
>Oh wow, back to the big-bang-commit ^^'
>
>So is this a bug or not? It seems to me that the uint underflows to
>UINT_MAX, and then wrapps around to 0 again through the ++..
>
>I take the liberty of ++CCing Kees, since I heard him talk a lot about
>overflowing on Plumbers.
>
>If it's not a bug, I would not use "Fixes". If it is a bug, it should
>be backported to stable, agreed?
>
>Plus, is there a report-link somewhere by Coverty that could be linked
>with "Closes: "?

Yeah, this is "avoid currently harmless overflow" fix. It is just avoiding depending on the wrapping behavior, which is an improvement but not really a "bug fix"; more a code style that will keep future work of making the kernel wrapping-safe.

>
>> Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
>
>Anyways, this in my eyes does what it's intended to do:
>
>Reviewed-by: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com>
>
>> ---
>>  drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c | 4 ++--
>>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
>> b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
>> index d48f48fda87c..c9283100332a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
>> +++ b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
>> @@ -443,8 +443,8 @@ static int dvb_frontend_swzigzag_autotune(struct
>> dvb_frontend *fe, int check_wra
>>  
>>  		default:
>>  			fepriv->auto_step++;
>> -			fepriv->auto_sub_step = -1; /* it'll be
>> incremented to 0 in a moment */
>> -			break;
>> +			fepriv->auto_sub_step = 0;
>> +			continue;
>>  		}
>>  
>>  		if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
>

But this change seems incomplete. The above line is no longer needed.

And I actually think this could be refractored to avoid needing "ready" at all?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook

Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] media: dvb_frontend: don't play tricks with underflow values

Posted by Mauro Carvalho Chehab 1 year, 3 months ago

Em Fri, 18 Oct 2024 07:37:52 -0700
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org> escreveu:

> On October 18, 2024 4:44:20 AM PDT, Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com> wrote:
> >On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 07:53 +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:  
> >> fepriv->auto_sub_step is unsigned. Setting it to -1 is just a
> >> trick to avoid calling continue, as reported by Coverity.
> >> 
> >> It relies to have this code just afterwards:
> >> 
> >> 	if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
> >> 
> >> Simplify the code by simply setting it to zero and use
> >> continue to return to the while loop.
> >> 
> >> Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")  
> >
> >Oh wow, back to the big-bang-commit ^^'
> >
> >So is this a bug or not? It seems to me that the uint underflows to
> >UINT_MAX, and then wrapps around to 0 again through the ++..
> >
> >I take the liberty of ++CCing Kees, since I heard him talk a lot about
> >overflowing on Plumbers.
> >
> >If it's not a bug, I would not use "Fixes". If it is a bug, it should
> >be backported to stable, agreed?

There is a long thread about Fixes: tag at ksummit ML.

	https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240714192914.1e1d3448@gandalf.local.home/T/

My conclusions for it is that:

1. Fixes: != Cc: stable.
   This is even somewhat stated at
   Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst when it defines additional
   rules for Cc: stable;

2. As result of (1), all Cc: stable need fixes, but not all fixes: need 
   a Cc: stable. Btw, I double-checked it with a -stable maintainer
   (Greg);

3. It seems that most of people at ksummit discussion (including me) 
   use Fixes: when the patch is not doing an improvement.

> >Plus, is there a report-link somewhere by Coverty that could be linked
> >with "Closes: "?  

Coverity issues are not publicly visible (and IMO it shouldn't). 
We should not add closes: to something that only the ones with access
to it may see.

> Yeah, this is "avoid currently harmless overflow" fix. It is just avoiding depending on the wrapping behavior, which is an improvement but not really a "bug fix"; more a code style that will keep future work of making the kernel wrapping-safe.

It is a fix in the sense that it solves an issue reported by Coverity.

> >>  		if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;  
> >  
> 
> But this change seems incomplete. The above line is no longer needed.

Yes, this is now a dead code.

> And I actually think this could be refractored to avoid needing "ready" at all?

Yeah, it sounds a good idea to place the zig-zag drift calculus on a
separate function, doing some cleanups in the process.

I'll add it to my todo list.

Thanks,
Mauro

Re: [PATCH v2 04/13] media: dvb_frontend: don't play tricks with underflow values

Posted by Philipp Stanner 1 year, 3 months ago

On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 07:37 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> 
> 
> On October 18, 2024 4:44:20 AM PDT, Philipp Stanner
> <pstanner@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2024-10-18 at 07:53 +0200, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > fepriv->auto_sub_step is unsigned. Setting it to -1 is just a
> > > trick to avoid calling continue, as reported by Coverity.
> > > 
> > > It relies to have this code just afterwards:
> > > 
> > > 	if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
> > > 
> > > Simplify the code by simply setting it to zero and use
> > > continue to return to the while loop.
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 1da177e4c3f4 ("Linux-2.6.12-rc2")
> > 
> > Oh wow, back to the big-bang-commit ^^'
> > 
> > So is this a bug or not? It seems to me that the uint underflows to
> > UINT_MAX, and then wrapps around to 0 again through the ++..
> > 
> > I take the liberty of ++CCing Kees, since I heard him talk a lot
> > about
> > overflowing on Plumbers.
> > 
> > If it's not a bug, I would not use "Fixes". If it is a bug, it
> > should
> > be backported to stable, agreed?
> > 
> > Plus, is there a report-link somewhere by Coverty that could be
> > linked
> > with "Closes: "?
> 
> Yeah, this is "avoid currently harmless overflow" fix. It is just
> avoiding depending on the wrapping behavior, which is an improvement
> but not really a "bug fix"; more a code style that will keep future
> work of making the kernel wrapping-safe.

Alright, then it shouldn't be backported, ack?
So I'd drop "Fixes:"

> 
> > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab+huawei@kernel.org>
> > 
> > Anyways, this in my eyes does what it's intended to do:
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Philipp Stanner <pstanner@redhat.com>
> > 
> > > ---
> > >  drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > > 
> > > diff --git a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> > > b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> > > index d48f48fda87c..c9283100332a 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/media/dvb-core/dvb_frontend.c
> > > @@ -443,8 +443,8 @@ static int
> > > dvb_frontend_swzigzag_autotune(struct
> > > dvb_frontend *fe, int check_wra
> > >  
> > >  		default:
> > >  			fepriv->auto_step++;
> > > -			fepriv->auto_sub_step = -1; /* it'll be
> > > incremented to 0 in a moment */
> > > -			break;
> > > +			fepriv->auto_sub_step = 0;
> > > +			continue;
> > >  		}
> > >  
> > >  		if (!ready) fepriv->auto_sub_step++;
> > 
> 
> But this change seems incomplete. The above line is no longer needed.

I haven't super duper intensively reviewed it, but wouldn't make that
statement – all the other branches in the switch-case reach this line.
And auto_sub_step might be changed above in the if-check again if
lnb_drift has changed; and it is changed in the switch-case.

> 
> And I actually think this could be refractored to avoid needing
> "ready" at all?

Could be. But that'd be indeed some work to get it right without
introducing a subtle bug, and Mauro just seems to want to fix a warning
he encountered on the way.

Thx
P.


> 
> -Kees
>