linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] EDAC, altera: Fix peripheral warnings for Cyclone5

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, 4 Apr 2017 11:59:10 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC, altera: Fix peripheral warnings for Cyclone5

On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 02:01:06PM -0500, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com wrote:
> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> The peripherals EDACs only exist on the Arria10 SoCFPGA. The Cyclone5
> initialization has EDAC warnings when the peripherals aren't found
> in the device tree. Fix by checking for Arria10 in the init functions.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  drivers/edac/altera_edac.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
> index 6421cc3..98e83f5 100644
> --- a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
> +++ b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
> @@ -1024,13 +1024,30 @@ static int __maybe_unused altr_init_memory_port(void __iomem *ioaddr, int port)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int invalid_model(void)
> +{
> +	struct device_node *np = of_find_node_by_path("/");

That needs to have its return value checked, of course.

> +	const char *model = of_get_property(np, "model", NULL);
> +
> +	of_node_put(np);
> +	if (!model || strncmp(model, "Altera SOCFPGA Arria 10", 23) != 0)

No need for the "!= 0"

> +		return -ENODEV;
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}

That function name "invalid_model" sounds like a boolean: is the model
invalid. So you can simply return bools and not -ENODEV as the context
you're using it is boolean.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.