Hi, On 10/09/2024 15:40, Peter Ujfalusi wrote: > The prop->src_dpn_prop and prop.sink_dpn_prop is allocated for the _number_ > of ports and it is forced as 0 index based. > > The original code was correct while the change to walk the bits and use > their position as index into the arrays is not correct. > > For exmple we can have the prop.source_ports=0x2, which means we have one > port, but the prop.src_dpn_prop[1] is accessing outside of the allocated > memory. > > This reverts commit 6fa78e9c41471fe43052cd6feba6eae1b0277ae3. I just noticed that Krzysztof already sent the revert patch but it is not picked up for stable-6.10.y https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240909164746.136629-1-krzysztof.kozlowski@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.10.y > Signed-off-by: Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > Hi, > > The reverted patch causes major regression on soundwire causing all audio > to fail. > Interestingly the patch is only in 6.10.8 and 6.10.9, not in mainline or linux-next. > > soundwire sdw-master-0-1: Program transport params failed: -22 > soundwire sdw-master-0-1: Program params failed: -22 > SDW1-Playback: ASoC: error at snd_soc_link_prepare on SDW1-Playback: -22 > > Regards, > Peter > > drivers/soundwire/stream.c | 8 ++++---- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/soundwire/stream.c b/drivers/soundwire/stream.c > index 00191b1d2260..4e9e7d2a942d 100644 > --- a/drivers/soundwire/stream.c > +++ b/drivers/soundwire/stream.c > @@ -1286,18 +1286,18 @@ struct sdw_dpn_prop *sdw_get_slave_dpn_prop(struct sdw_slave *slave, > unsigned int port_num) > { > struct sdw_dpn_prop *dpn_prop; > - unsigned long mask; > + u8 num_ports; > int i; > > if (direction == SDW_DATA_DIR_TX) { > - mask = slave->prop.source_ports; > + num_ports = hweight32(slave->prop.source_ports); > dpn_prop = slave->prop.src_dpn_prop; > } else { > - mask = slave->prop.sink_ports; > + num_ports = hweight32(slave->prop.sink_ports); > dpn_prop = slave->prop.sink_dpn_prop; > } > > - for_each_set_bit(i, &mask, 32) { > + for (i = 0; i < num_ports; i++) { > if (dpn_prop[i].num == port_num) > return &dpn_prop[i]; > } -- Péter
