lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] staging: wilc1000: fix some endianness sparse warnings
On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 10:33:25AM +0200, Thibaut Robert wrote:
> Le mardi 05 juin 2018 à 10:36:31 (+0300), Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> > On Mon, Jun 04, 2018 at 09:32:50PM +0200, Thibaut Robert wrote:
> > > Le mercredi 30 mai 2018 à 14:17:25 (+0300), Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> > > > On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 09:11:43PM +0200, Thibaut Robert wrote:
> > > > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > > > > index e248702ee519..745bf5ca2622 100644
> > > > > --- a/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > > > > +++ b/drivers/staging/wilc1000/wilc_wfi_cfgoperations.c
> > > > > @@ -1431,7 +1431,7 @@ void wilc_wfi_p2p_rx(struct net_device *dev, u8 *buff, u32 size)
> > > > >
> > > > > freq = ieee80211_channel_to_frequency(curr_channel, NL80211_BAND_2GHZ);
> > > > >
> > > > > - if (!ieee80211_is_action(buff[FRAME_TYPE_ID])) {
> > > > > + if (!ieee80211_is_action(cpu_to_le16(buff[FRAME_TYPE_ID]))) {
> > > >
> > > > "buff" comes from the network, it's going to be little endian, not cpu
> > > > endian. The rest of the function treats it as CPU endian but I'm pretty
> > > > sure it's wrong...
> > > buff comes from the network but we are looking at single byte here.
> > > ieee80211_is_action expects an le16, so we I added this to extend an u8
> > > to an le16. Is this incorrect ?
> > >
> > > Or maybe we the buff has the second byte ? but that I can't tell.
> >
> > You raise a good point that I hadn't seen. The original code is clearly
> > buggy. But your fix isn't correct either... The other thing to
> > consider is that cpu_to_le16() is basically a cast to u16 on x86 so it's
> > a no-op here.
> The sparse warning is clearly spotting a real issue. I tried to at least
> have big endian handle correctly the 0-255 case. I am willing to drop
> the change (since I agree it's not very satisfying and will mask an issue),
> but may I ask you to explain how it is wrong ? How would you correctly expand
> an u8 to __le16 ? I think in big endian we need to swap the bytes.

You're right that on big endian we would need to swap the bytes and
cpu_to_le16() does that.

regards,
dan carpenter

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-05 10:54    [W:0.032 / U:101.352 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site