LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Marcel Holtmann <marcel@holtmann.org>
To: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc: Alain Michaud <alainmichaud@google.com>,
Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@gmail.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
BlueZ <linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Sonny Sasaka <sonnysasaka@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: Simplify / fix return values from tk_request
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:06:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6456552C-5910-4D77-9607-14D9D1FA38FD@holtmann.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <0f0ea237-5976-e56f-cd31-96b76bb03254@roeck-us.net>
Hi Guenter,
>>> Some static checker run by 0day reports a variableScope warning.
>>>
>>> net/bluetooth/smp.c:870:6: warning:
>>> The scope of the variable 'err' can be reduced. [variableScope]
>>>
>>> There is no need for two separate variables holding return values.
>>> Stick with the existing variable. While at it, don't pre-initialize
>>> 'ret' because it is set in each code path.
>>>
>>> tk_request() is supposed to return a negative error code on errors,
>>> not a bluetooth return code. The calling code converts the return
>>> value to SMP_UNSPECIFIED if needed.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 92516cd97fd4 ("Bluetooth: Always request for user confirmation for Just Works")
>>> Cc: Sonny Sasaka <sonnysasaka@chromium.org>
>>> Signed-off-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
>>> ---
>>> net/bluetooth/smp.c | 9 ++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/bluetooth/smp.c b/net/bluetooth/smp.c
>>> index d0b695ee49f6..30e8626dd553 100644
>>> --- a/net/bluetooth/smp.c
>>> +++ b/net/bluetooth/smp.c
>>> @@ -854,8 +854,7 @@ static int tk_request(struct l2cap_conn *conn, u8 remote_oob, u8 auth,
>>> struct l2cap_chan *chan = conn->smp;
>>> struct smp_chan *smp = chan->data;
>>> u32 passkey = 0;
>>> - int ret = 0;
>>> - int err;
>>> + int ret;
>>>
>>> /* Initialize key for JUST WORKS */
>>> memset(smp->tk, 0, sizeof(smp->tk));
>>> @@ -887,12 +886,12 @@ static int tk_request(struct l2cap_conn *conn, u8 remote_oob, u8 auth,
>>> /* If Just Works, Continue with Zero TK and ask user-space for
>>> * confirmation */
>>> if (smp->method == JUST_WORKS) {
>>> - err = mgmt_user_confirm_request(hcon->hdev, &hcon->dst,
>>> + ret = mgmt_user_confirm_request(hcon->hdev, &hcon->dst,
>>> hcon->type,
>>> hcon->dst_type,
>>> passkey, 1);
>>> - if (err)
>>> - return SMP_UNSPECIFIED;
>>> + if (ret)
>>> + return ret;
>> I think there may be some miss match between expected types of error
>> codes here. The SMP error code type seems to be expected throughout
>> this code base, so this change would propagate a potential negative
>> value while the rest of the SMP protocol expects strictly positive
>> error codes.
>>
>
> Up to the patch introducing the SMP_UNSPECIFIED return value, tk_request()
> returned negative error codes, and all callers convert it to SMP_UNSPECIFIED.
>
> If tk_request() is supposed to return SMP_UNSPECIFIED on error, it should
> be returned consistently, and its callers don't have to convert it again.
maybe we need to fix that initial patch then.
Regards
Marcel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-04-06 12:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-04-03 15:02 Guenter Roeck
2020-04-03 15:13 ` Alain Michaud
2020-04-03 16:42 ` Guenter Roeck
2020-04-03 16:56 ` Alain Michaud
2020-04-04 0:39 ` Sonny Sasaka
2020-04-06 12:06 ` Marcel Holtmann [this message]
2020-04-06 18:13 ` Sonny Sasaka
2020-04-06 18:26 ` Marcel Holtmann
2020-04-06 18:45 ` Guenter Roeck
2020-04-06 19:15 ` Sonny Sasaka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=6456552C-5910-4D77-9607-14D9D1FA38FD@holtmann.org \
--to=marcel@holtmann.org \
--cc=alainmichaud@google.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=johan.hedberg@gmail.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sonnysasaka@chromium.org \
--subject='Re: [PATCH] Bluetooth: Simplify / fix return values from tk_request' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).