From patchwork Fri Aug 9 07:20:10 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Ping-Ke Shih X-Patchwork-Id: 13758460 X-Patchwork-Delegate: pkshih@realtek.com Received: from rtits2.realtek.com.tw (rtits2.realtek.com [211.75.126.72]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70C2E17335E for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 07:20:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=211.75.126.72 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723188057; cv=none; b=tsJVYwKU0TfhQAkJfSvrhmP4yk5nfIge50efFbKEa/Me+OWz2GgOZSuGUnkzeoYeSFrVX0mFQLNdDUz7dcShK1uWzDbhjFQt7kALEIvNXCyzKSEGBZVR7XgCU23GbY6lrfdNyABdbFyVWy6r9hJYvFpwoK84egb3cBs82McqPBs= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723188057; c=relaxed/simple; bh=KtnPIt3F0/Td+JY5zQ1mFtpb077sKTHWpenqrwunWXY=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=OYpaMzlgvLfYIITu9589vsRhobdFSL1gD+kgYn6toP9HN/dqie8+BLwxgcLuIVk+w0DabhzCzfcnGX95LRFrbkIbyW0jQjF6HGbUvSXzR4fzfN8KNwNZ/LgnCscUxULU+Mk2enO5LLWWm6huyRWF3n3AYCnk5Lrra5dhesI9F2Q= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=realtek.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=realtek.com; dkim=temperror (0-bit key) header.d=realtek.com header.i=@realtek.com header.b=AR8iHjz0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=211.75.126.72 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=realtek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=realtek.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=temperror (0-bit key) header.d=realtek.com header.i=@realtek.com header.b="AR8iHjz0" X-SpamFilter-By: ArmorX SpamTrap 5.78 with qID 4797Kr252514074, This message is accepted by code: ctloc85258 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=realtek.com; s=dkim; t=1723188053; bh=KtnPIt3F0/Td+JY5zQ1mFtpb077sKTHWpenqrwunWXY=; h=From:To:CC:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type; b=AR8iHjz0IYV75Lr874KTEHGJwcS4DLNAlb5QVlhY0FRDQEDwtmvKVP8QUDFt4ZrTc 7lXgcboIp4yj3WUDBdAIsPd/gVbWnh2BO0x3ZwICOEZJsj2Bqa1NdaM8SEvpE9jP+P JHpR275kN/9gKPydhyGxzhtG0QOGXJRgLxvqMq3JOe7HmmI1JwSzIU7/Lf1iSk9A44 sEvSjS4ErpMkzrx/cKdWbXxTIpQo2k8Ogl2WmuD1wv8uNZwJ16pVAPKQyUr6mLL9xB erGIgWqDprVH8u6Z6xlIgkXDIKdq3pvHIWl3OJCnlycszAEbJ+0s+Mg2lgQIr6A9ec mLqFkKZV7/oUA== Received: from mail.realtek.com (rtexh36506.realtek.com.tw[172.21.6.27]) by rtits2.realtek.com.tw (8.15.2/3.02/5.92) with ESMTPS id 4797Kr252514074 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:20:53 +0800 Received: from RTEXMBS04.realtek.com.tw (172.21.6.97) by RTEXH36506.realtek.com.tw (172.21.6.27) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.39; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:20:53 +0800 Received: from [127.0.1.1] (172.21.69.94) by RTEXMBS04.realtek.com.tw (172.21.6.97) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.1.2507.35; Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:20:52 +0800 From: Ping-Ke Shih To: CC: , Subject: [PATCH 4/6] wifi: rtw89: correct base HT rate mask for firmware Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2024 15:20:10 +0800 Message-ID: <20240809072012.84152-5-pkshih@realtek.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.25.1 In-Reply-To: <20240809072012.84152-1-pkshih@realtek.com> References: <20240809072012.84152-1-pkshih@realtek.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-ClientProxiedBy: RTEXMBS02.realtek.com.tw (172.21.6.95) To RTEXMBS04.realtek.com.tw (172.21.6.97) Coverity reported that u8 rx_mask << 24 will become signed 32 bits, which casting to unsigned 64 bits will do sign extension. For example, putting 0x80000000 (signed 32 bits) to a u64 variable will become 0xFFFFFFFF_80000000. The real case we meet is: rx_mask[0...3] = ff ff 00 00 ra_mask = 0xffffffff_ff0ff000 After this fix: rx_mask[0...3] = ff ff 00 00 ra_mask = 0x00000000_ff0ff000 Fortunately driver does bitwise-AND with incorrect ra_mask and supported rates (1ss and 2ss rate only) afterward, so the final rate mask of original code is still correct. Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1504762 ("Unintended sign extension") Signed-off-by: Ping-Ke Shih --- drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c index aa4fc9115995..7306fb679e95 100644 --- a/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c +++ b/drivers/net/wireless/realtek/rtw89/phy.c @@ -356,8 +356,8 @@ static void rtw89_phy_ra_sta_update(struct rtw89_dev *rtwdev, csi_mode = RTW89_RA_RPT_MODE_HT; ra_mask |= ((u64)sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[3] << 48) | ((u64)sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[2] << 36) | - (sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[1] << 24) | - (sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[0] << 12); + ((u64)sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[1] << 24) | + ((u64)sta->deflink.ht_cap.mcs.rx_mask[0] << 12); high_rate_masks = rtw89_ra_mask_ht_rates; if (sta->deflink.ht_cap.cap & IEEE80211_HT_CAP_RX_STBC) stbc_en = 1;