| Message ID | 20191106145816.9367-1-pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | 2acdcabb8a4089476208a822050dd47a6557290d |
| Headers | show |
| Series | ASoC: SOF: topology: Fix bytes control size checks | expand |
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:21:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > The patch > > ASoC: SOF: topology: Fix bytes control size checks > > has been applied to the asoc tree at > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-5.4 It's not immediately obvious if something similar is needed for -next, the relevant code has been redone since v5.4 was branched off. If something is needed someone will have to send something.
On 11/6/19 10:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:21:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: >> The patch >> >> ASoC: SOF: topology: Fix bytes control size checks >> >> has been applied to the asoc tree at >> >> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/sound.git for-5.4 > > It's not immediately obvious if something similar is needed for -next, > the relevant code has been redone since v5.4 was branched off. If > something is needed someone will have to send something. I checked that the patch applies even before Jaska's October rework, where the same bug was present. so in theory picking this fix for 5.2..5.4 would work as usual.
On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 10:49:20AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: > On 11/6/19 10:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:21:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > > It's not immediately obvious if something similar is needed for -next, > > the relevant code has been redone since v5.4 was branched off. If > > something is needed someone will have to send something. > I checked that the patch applies even before Jaska's October rework, where > the same bug was present. so in theory picking this fix for 5.2..5.4 would > work as usual. What I'm saying is that I did that and if the fix is still needed after the rework someone will need to send a version that applies after the rework.
On 11/6/19 10:54 AM, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 10:49:20AM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote: >> On 11/6/19 10:29 AM, Mark Brown wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:21:46PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote: > >>> It's not immediately obvious if something similar is needed for -next, >>> the relevant code has been redone since v5.4 was branched off. If >>> something is needed someone will have to send something. > >> I checked that the patch applies even before Jaska's October rework, where >> the same bug was present. so in theory picking this fix for 5.2..5.4 would >> work as usual. > > What I'm saying is that I did that and if the fix is still needed after > the rework someone will need to send a version that applies after the > rework. Sorry, the same patch will apply before and after the rework, so you can apply it to for-next as well. You don't need a new version.
diff --git a/sound/soc/sof/topology.c b/sound/soc/sof/topology.c index 17fe6a1d5f3e..6096731e89ce 100644 --- a/sound/soc/sof/topology.c +++ b/sound/soc/sof/topology.c @@ -1048,15 +1048,16 @@ static int sof_control_load_bytes(struct snd_soc_component *scomp, struct soc_bytes_ext *sbe = (struct soc_bytes_ext *)kc->private_value; int max_size = sbe->max; - if (le32_to_cpu(control->priv.size) > max_size) { + /* init the get/put bytes data */ + scontrol->size = sizeof(struct sof_ipc_ctrl_data) + + le32_to_cpu(control->priv.size); + + if (scontrol->size > max_size) { dev_err(sdev->dev, "err: bytes data size %d exceeds max %d.\n", - control->priv.size, max_size); + scontrol->size, max_size); return -EINVAL; } - /* init the get/put bytes data */ - scontrol->size = sizeof(struct sof_ipc_ctrl_data) + - le32_to_cpu(control->priv.size); scontrol->control_data = kzalloc(max_size, GFP_KERNEL); cdata = scontrol->control_data; if (!scontrol->control_data)