linux-hardening - Re: [Patch v6 10/12] pstore/ram: Add dynamic ramoops region support through commandline

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Tue, 28 Nov 2023 21:33:30 +0530
From: Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>
To: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
CC: Pavan Kondeti <quic_pkondeti@...cinc.com>, <corbet@....net>,
        <agross@...nel.org>, <andersson@...nel.org>,
        <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>, <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        <keescook@...omium.org>, <tony.luck@...el.com>, <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
        <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>, <vigneshr@...com>, <nm@...com>,
        <matthias.bgg@...il.com>, <kgene@...nel.org>,
        <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>, <bmasney@...hat.com>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        <linux-samsung-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...cinc.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch v6 10/12] pstore/ram: Add dynamic ramoops region support
 through commandline

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 04:02:33PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> > >   static int ramoops_pstore_open(struct pstore_info *psi)
> > >   {
> > > @@ -915,14 +965,18 @@ static void __init ramoops_register_dummy(void)
> > >   	/*
> > >   	 * Prepare a dummy platform data structure to carry the module
> > > -	 * parameters. If mem_size isn't set, then there are no module
> > > -	 * parameters, and we can skip this.
> > > +	 * parameters. If mem_size isn't set, check for dynamic ramoops
> > > +	 * size and use if it is set.
> > >   	 */
> > > -	if (!mem_size)
> > > +	if (!mem_size && !dyn_ramoops_size)
> > >   		return;
> > 
> > If mem_size and dyn_ramoops_size are set, you are taking
> > dyn_ramoops_size precedence here. The comment is a bit confusing, pls
> > review it once.
> 
> Ideally, both should not be set and there will always be
> confusion.
> 
> Do you think, if we use mem_size a single variable both for earlier
> and dynamic ramoops where based on dyn_ramoops_size=true/on a boolean
> it will take dynamic ramoops path and if not mentioned it will take older
> path.
> 

Sounds like a good idea to me. You would need a callback for mem_size 
module param handling. Because dyn_ramoops can be passed before mem_size
parameter. Also, we can't make pstore ram as module i.e decoupling
dynamic ramoops from pstore ram module.

Thanks,
Pavan