linux-hardening - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: ramoops: Inherit reserve memory property

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 27 Jan 2023 16:29:35 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        "Guilherme G . Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] dt-bindings: ramoops: Inherit reserve memory
 property

On 27/01/2023 16:10, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> The reserved memory region for ramoops is assumed to be at a
> fixed and known location when read from the devicetree. This
> is not desirable in an environment where it is preferred the
> region to be dynamically allocated at runtime, as opposed to
> being fixed at compile time.
> 
> So, update the ramoops binding by inheriting some reserve memory
> property to allocate the ramoops region dynamically.
> 
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> Cc: Guilherme G. Piccoli <gpiccoli@...lia.com>
> Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
> Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>
> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@...cinc.com>
> ---
> Changes in v3:
>  - Fixed yaml error and updated commit text as per comment.
> 
> Change in v2:
>   - Added this patch as per changes going to be done in patch 3/3
> 
>  .../bindings/reserved-memory/ramoops.yaml          | 34 ++++++++++++++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/ramoops.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/ramoops.yaml
> index 0391871..8741626 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/ramoops.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/ramoops.yaml
> @@ -10,7 +10,8 @@ description: |
>    ramoops provides persistent RAM storage for oops and panics, so they can be
>    recovered after a reboot. This is a child-node of "/reserved-memory", and
>    is named "ramoops" after the backend, rather than "pstore" which is the
> -  subsystem.
> +  subsystem. This region can be reserved both statically or dynamically by
> +  using appropriate property in device tree.
>  
>    Parts of this storage may be set aside for other persistent log buffers, such
>    as kernel log messages, or for optional ECC error-correction data.  The total
> @@ -112,7 +113,13 @@ unevaluatedProperties: false
>  
>  required:
>    - compatible
> -  - reg
> +
> +oneOf:
> +  - required:
> +      - reg
> +
> +  - required:
> +      - size
>  
>  anyOf:
>    - required: [record-size]
> @@ -142,3 +149,26 @@ examples:
>              };
>          };
>      };
> +
> +  - |
> +    / {
> +        compatible = "foo";
> +        model = "foo";
> +        #address-cells = <1>;
> +        #size-cells = <1>;
> +
> +        reserved-memory {
> +            #address-cells = <1>;
> +            #size-cells = <1>;
> +            ranges;
> +
> +            ramoops: ramoops_region {

This is a friendly reminder during the review process.

It seems my previous comments were not fully addressed. Maybe my
feedback got lost between the quotes, maybe you just forgot to apply it.
Please go back to the previous discussion and either implement all
requested changes or keep discussing them.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Krzysztof