On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 02:10:08AM +0100, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 12:24:43AM +0000, Qasim Ijaz wrote:
> > In mii_nway_restart() during the line:
> >
> > bmcr = mii->mdio_read(mii->dev, mii->phy_id, MII_BMCR);
> >
> > The code attempts to call mii->mdio_read which is ch9200_mdio_read().
> >
> > ch9200_mdio_read() utilises a local buffer, which is initialised
> > with control_read():
> >
> > unsigned char buff[2];
> >
> > However buff is conditionally initialised inside control_read():
> >
> > if (err == size) {
> > memcpy(data, buf, size);
> > }
> >
> > If the condition of "err == size" is not met, then buff remains
> > uninitialised. Once this happens the uninitialised buff is accessed
> > and returned during ch9200_mdio_read():
> >
> > return (buff[0] | buff[1] << 8);
> >
> > The problem stems from the fact that ch9200_mdio_read() ignores the
> > return value of control_read(), leading to uinit-access of buff.
> >
> > To fix this we should check the return value of control_read()
> > and return early on error.
>
> What about get_mac_address()?
>
> If you find a bug, it is a good idea to look around and see if there
> are any more instances of the same bug. I could be wrong, but it seems
> like get_mac_address() suffers from the same problem?
Thank you for the feedback Andrew. I checked get_mac_address() before
sending this patch and to me it looks like it does check the return value of
control_read(). It accumulates the return value of each control_read() call into
rd_mac_len and then checks if it not equal to what is expected (ETH_ALEN which is 6),
I believe each call should return 2.
>
> Andrew
