Shouldn't corrupt data be a warning rather than debug message, since it indicates something wrong with the transport?+ * + * @cport: cport id + * @hdr: greybus operation header + * @payload: greybus message payload + */ +struct hdlc_greybus_frame { + __le16 cport; + struct gb_operation_msg_hdr hdr; + u8 payload[]; +} __packed; + static void hdlc_rx_greybus_frame(struct gb_beagleplay *bg, u8 *buf, u16 len) { - u16 cport_id; - struct gb_operation_msg_hdr *hdr = (struct gb_operation_msg_hdr *)buf; + struct hdlc_greybus_frame *gb_frame = (struct hdlc_greybus_frame *)buf; + u16 cport_id = le16_to_cpu(gb_frame->cport);- memcpy(&cport_id, hdr->pad, sizeof(cport_id));+ /* Ensure that the greybus message is valid */ + if (le16_to_cpu(gb_frame->hdr.size) > len - sizeof(cport_id)) { + dev_warn_ratelimited(&bg->sd->dev, "Invalid/Incomplete greybus message");Don't spam the kernel log for corrupted data on the line, that would be a mess. Use a tracepoint?+ return; + }dev_dbg(&bg->sd->dev, "Greybus Operation %u type %X cport %u status %u received",- hdr->operation_id, hdr->type, le16_to_cpu(cport_id), hdr->result); + gb_frame->hdr.operation_id, gb_frame->hdr.type, cport_id, gb_frame->hdr.result);Better yet, put the error in the debug message?
It seems that taking address of members of packed structures is not valid. I get the `address-of-packed-member` warnings. Is it fine to ignore those in kernel?- greybus_data_rcvd(bg->gb_hd, le16_to_cpu(cport_id), buf, len);+ greybus_data_rcvd(bg->gb_hd, cport_id, &buf[sizeof(cport_id)],Fun with pointer math. This feels really fragile, why not just point to the field instead?
}static void hdlc_rx_dbg_frame(const struct gb_beagleplay *bg, const char *buf, u16 len)@@ -339,7 +357,7 @@ static struct serdev_device_ops gb_beagleplay_ops = { static int gb_message_send(struct gb_host_device *hd, u16 cport, struct gb_message *msg, gfp_t mask) { struct gb_beagleplay *bg = dev_get_drvdata(&hd->dev); - struct hdlc_payload payloads[2]; + struct hdlc_payload payloads[3];why 3? It's ok to put this on the stack?
Well, the HDLC payload is just to store the length of the payload along with a pointer to its data. (kind of emulate a fat pointer). The reason for doing it this way is to avoid having to create a temp buffer for each message when sending data over UART (which was done in the initial version of the driver).
Ayush Singh _______________________________________________ greybus-dev mailing list -- greybus-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to greybus-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|