On Mon, Jul 30, 2007 at 06:04:06PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Greg, > > It is a problem because I use the pre-allocated buffer given by the layer > usb-serial. Of course, I can create a new urb structure with a bigger > buffer but I just suggest that using the buffer stored in the > usb_serial_device seems to be logic and like a said, other driver use > it without checking the buffer_size. Are you sure that the pl2303 is > well protected against a buffer overflow ?
I do not see any paths within the pl2303 driver that would cause such a buffer overflow at all. > What happens if a pl2303 device give a maxsize of 64 bytes like my device ? It should "just work", as it looks at the size of the buffer it is filling up when it does it (look at the logic in pl2303_send() for confirmation of this.) The 2.4 version of the pl2303 driver is much different, I don't remember which one you copied your driver from, but I think that one also should be just fine. > The driver will then make a buffer overflow and a kernel panic may > occur. This was the module I used to study and write my own driver. If you see the same error for the pl2303 driver, please let me know. > So I agree with the proposition of Oliver to add a buffer_size in the > usb_serial_driver structure. > This is very useful to prepare a buffer able to make bulk transfer. I don't think it is necessary to add as it has not been a problem yet for any driver that I know of. I think you are just doing something wrong in your driver :) thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
