linux-kernel - Re: Xilinx: hwicap driver comments

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]

Message-ID: <fa686aa40802071234r5736aec6h12d482b8a2c408c0@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 7 Feb 2008 13:34:43 -0700
From:	"Grant Likely" <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
To:	"Jiri Slaby" <jirislaby@...il.com>
Cc:	"Stephen Neuendorffer" <stephen.neuendorffer@...inx.com>,
	"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: Xilinx: hwicap driver comments

On 2/7/08, Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...il.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> first of all, I think that the driver should go through lkml before upstream
> merge or at least be in -mm for a while (I think this used to be a rule some
> time ago), correct me if I'm wrong, but none of it happened.

Hmmm, if that's the rule then I apologize.  I had thought that arch
specific drivers were okay (assuming not part of a common subsystem
like USB, Eth, etc).  The driver went through a number of review
cycles on the linuxppc mailing list and the comments had settled down.
 I didn't see any problem in merging it as it is a platform specific
driver only used by the Xilinx Virtex chips.  It is only used by
arch/powerpc and only when CONFIG_XILINX_VIRTEX is selected.

Linus has already pulled Paul's tree so the patch is already merged
upstream.  Does it need to come back out?

Stephen, can you please repost you patch to the LKML?  Even if the
driver is allowed to stay in for the time being you can at least get
feedback on what needs to be changed.

Cheers,
g.

>
> Few comments I have:
> - release f_op retval is silently ignored, I guess you will get your device into
> undefined state when the first function fails (esp. when you interrupt the sem)
> - semaphores are deprecated
> - class_device_create is deprecated
> - module_init/exit functions should be __init, not __devinit/exit (not a bug,
> it's subset)
> - this piece:
>          drvdata = kmalloc(sizeof(struct hwicap_drvdata), GFP_KERNEL);
>          if (!drvdata) {
>                  dev_err(dev, "Couldn't allocate device private record\n");
>                  return -ENOMEM;
>          }
>   memset((void *)drvdata, 0, sizeof(struct hwicap_drvdata));
>
>   kmalloc + memset = kzalloc
>   null probed_devices[id] on that fail path and on failed1 label
>
> - from/to (void *) casts are useless
> - io resources are at least ulong
> - don't understand this:
>                  memcpy(kbuf, drvdata->read_buffer, bytes_remaining);
>                  drvdata->read_buffer_in_use = bytes_remaining;
>                  free_page((unsigned long)kbuf);
> - can this overlap (=>memmove)?
>                  memcpy(drvdata->read_buffer + bytes_to_read,
>                                  drvdata->read_buffer, 4 - bytes_to_read);
> - is platform probing function race-proof (like pci)?
> - run sparse on it, you mix __user with non-__user at least
>


-- 
Grant Likely, B.Sc., P.Eng.
Secret Lab Technologies Ltd.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/