tpm: fix unused-value issues in tpm_try_transmit
Subsystems (2)
PATCH 1/1 tpm: fix unused-value issues in tpm_try_transmit
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc = tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;
Fix this by removing such assignments.
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1470245 ("Unused value")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1470250 ("Unused value")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1470251 ("Unused value")
--- drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c | 8 ++------ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
drivers/char/tpm/tpm-interface.c +2 -6
@@ -512,7 +512,6 @@ static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip,if (chip->ops->req_canceled (chip, status)) {dev_err (&chip->dev,"Operation Canceled\n" ); - rc = -ECANCELED ; goto out; }
@@ -522,7 +521,6 @@ static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, chip->ops->cancel (chip);dev_err (&chip->dev,"Operation Timed out\n" ); - rc = -ETIME ; goto out; out_recv:
@@ -533,14 +531,12 @@ static ssize_t tpm_try_transmit(struct tpm_chip *chip, "tpm_transmit: tpm_recv: error %d\n", rc); goto out; }else if (len <TPM_HEADER_SIZE ) { - rc = -EFAULT ; goto out; } -if (len !=be32_to_cpu (header->length)) { - rc = -EFAULT ; +if (len !=be32_to_cpu (header->length)) goto out; - } + rc =tpm2_commit_space (chip, space, ordinal, buf, &len);if (rc)
Signature · 1 line
2.7.4
Jason Gunthorpe
reviewerQuoted 10 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc =tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;Fix this by removing such assignments.
Should this be done by not quashing rc during the error unwind rather than dropping the errors?
Jason
Quoted 10 lines · Jason Gunthorpe
Quoted 9 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc =tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;
Quoted 4 lines
Quoted 1 line
Fix this by removing such assignments.
Should this be done by not quashing rc during the error unwind rather than dropping the errors?
Yeah.`
Wondering if tpm_go_idle() should simply be a void-function i.e. issue just a warning inside (disclaimer: did not revisit its code when writing this).
Quoted 1 line
Jason
/Jarkko
Quoted 14 lines · Jason Gunthorpe
Quoted 12 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Quoted 10 lines
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc =tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;Fix this by removing such assignments.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Should this be done by not quashing rc during the error unwind rather than dropping the errors?
Yeah.`
Wondering if
tpm_go_idle()should simply be a void-function i.e. issue just a warning inside (disclaimer: did not revisit its code when writing this).
We did have rather a long discussion about it when it was merged. There are two flows that may crash
rc = tpm2_commit_space()
but you still can need to
rc = go_idle()
which also may crash which may override the previous value.
Frankly the second one is fatal, the stack will go out of sync. We may do void here as the stack will crash in a subsequent command.
The 'goto out' is quite a bug, probably caused by code movement.
Thanks
Tomas
Quoted 28 lines · Tomas
Quoted 14 lines · Jason Gunthorpe
Quoted 12 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Quoted 10 lines
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc =tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;Fix this by removing such assignments.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Should this be done by not quashing rc during the error unwind rather than dropping the errors?
Yeah.`
Wondering if
tpm_go_idle()should simply be a void-function i.e. issue just a warning inside (disclaimer: did not revisit its code when writing this).We did have rather a long discussion about it when it was merged. There are two flows that may crash
rc =tpm2_commit_space()but you still can need to
Quoted 8 lines
rc =
go_idle()which also may crash which may override the previous value.
Frankly the second one is fatal, the stack will go out of sync. We may do void here as the stack will crash in a subsequent command.
The 'goto out' is quite a bug, probably caused by code movement.
I just looked at the code properly and noticed that there is a regression caused by 627448e85c76 ("tpm: separate cmd_ready/go_idle from runtime_pm") i.e. when tpm_go_idle() fails it loops back and retries tpm_go_idle().
/Jarkko
Quoted 36 lines · Jarkko Sakkinen
Quoted 35 lines · Tomas
Quoted 14 lines · Jason Gunthorpe
Quoted 12 lines · Gustavo A. R. Silva
Quoted 10 lines
Currently, there are some values assigned to variable *rc*, which are never actually used in any computation, because such variable is updated at line 550, before they can be used:
549out:
550 rc =tpm_go_idle(chip, flags);
551 if (rc)
552 goto out;Fix this by removing such assignments.
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
Should this be done by not quashing rc during the error unwind rather than dropping the errors?
Yeah.`
Wondering if
tpm_go_idle()should simply be a void-function i.e. issue just a warning inside (disclaimer: did not revisit its code when writing this).We did have rather a long discussion about it when it was merged. There are two flows that may crash
rc =tpm2_commit_space()but you still can need to
rc =
go_idle()which also may crash which may override the previous value.
Frankly the second one is fatal, the stack will go out of sync. We may do void here as the stack will crash in a subsequent command.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
The 'goto out' is quite a bug, probably caused by code movement.
I just looked at the code properly and noticed that there is a regression caused by
627448e85c76("tpm: separate cmd_ready/go_idle fromruntime_pm") i.e. whentpm_go_idle()fails it loops back and retriestpm_go_idle().
Yes, that's what I said, this part code was moved forth but no the label.
Tomas