| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20090529162907.9cb1bba2.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 16:29:07 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp>
Cc: linux-mips@...ux-mips.org, ralf@...ux-mips.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] hwrng: Add TX4939 RNG driver
On Wed, 27 May 2009 00:02:20 +0900
Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp> wrote:
> This patch adds support for the integrated RNG of the TX4939 SoC.
>
I think Herbert handles hwrng patches?
I assume that the MIPS patch "[PATCH] TXx9: Add TX4939 RNG support"
depends upon this patch?
> create mode 100644 drivers/char/hw_random/tx4939-rng.c
>
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig b/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
> index 5fab647..9d321cc 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
> @@ -148,3 +148,16 @@ config HW_RANDOM_VIRTIO
>
> To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the
> module will be called virtio-rng. If unsure, say N.
> +
> +config HW_RANDOM_TX4939
> + tristate "TX4939 Random Number Generator support"
> + depends on HW_RANDOM && SOC_TX4939
> + default HW_RANDOM
> + ---help---
> + This driver provides kernel-side support for the Random Number
> + Generator hardware found on TX4939 SoC.
> +
> + To compile this driver as a module, choose M here: the
> + module will be called tx4939-rng.
> +
> + If unsure, say Y.
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/Makefile b/drivers/char/hw_random/Makefile
> index e81d21a..936d388 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/Makefile
> @@ -15,3 +15,4 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_IXP4XX) += ixp4xx-rng.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_OMAP) += omap-rng.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_PASEMI) += pasemi-rng.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_VIRTIO) += virtio-rng.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_HW_RANDOM_TX4939) += tx4939-rng.o
> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/tx4939-rng.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/tx4939-rng.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..27aed22
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/tx4939-rng.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,157 @@
> +/*
> + * RNG driver for TX4939 Random Number Generators (RNG)
> + *
> + * Copyright (C) 2009 Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp>
> + *
> + * This file is subject to the terms and conditions of the GNU General Public
> + * License. See the file "COPYING" in the main directory of this archive
> + * for more details.
> + */
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/delay.h>
> +#include <linux/io.h>
> +#include <linux/platform_device.h>
> +#include <linux/hw_random.h>
> +
> +#define TX4939_RNG_RCSR 0x00000000
> +#define TX4939_RNG_ROR(n) (0x00000018 + (n) * 8)
> +
> +#define TX4939_RNG_RCSR_INTE 0x00000008
> +#define TX4939_RNG_RCSR_RST 0x00000004
> +#define TX4939_RNG_RCSR_FIN 0x00000002
> +#define TX4939_RNG_RCSR_ST 0x00000001
> +
> +struct tx4939_rng {
> + struct hwrng rng;
> + void __iomem *base;
> + u64 databuf[3];
> + unsigned int data_avail;
> +};
> +
> +static u64 read_rng(void __iomem *base, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> + /* Caller must disable interrupts */
> + return ____raw_readq(base + offset);
> +}
What is the reasoning behind the local_irq_disable() requirement?
Because I'm wondering whether this is safe on SMP?
> +static void write_rng(u64 val, void __iomem *base, unsigned int offset)
> +{
> + return ____raw_writeq(val, base + offset);
> +}
> +
> +static int tx4939_rng_data_present(struct hwrng *rng, int wait)
> +{
> + struct tx4939_rng *rngdev = container_of(rng, struct tx4939_rng, rng);
> + int i;
> +
> + if (rngdev->data_avail)
> + return rngdev->data_avail;
> + for (i = 0; i < 20; i++) {
> + local_irq_disable();
> + if (!(read_rng(rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_RCSR)
> + & TX4939_RNG_RCSR_ST)) {
> + rngdev->databuf[0] =
> + read_rng(rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_ROR(0));
> + rngdev->databuf[1] =
> + read_rng(rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_ROR(1));
> + rngdev->databuf[2] =
> + read_rng(rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_ROR(2));
> + rngdev->data_avail =
> + sizeof(rngdev->databuf) / sizeof(u32);
> + /* Start RNG */
> + write_rng(TX4939_RNG_RCSR_ST,
> + rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_RCSR);
> + wait = 0;
> + }
> + local_irq_enable();
> + if (!wait)
> + break;
> + udelay(1);
> + }
> + return rngdev->data_avail;
> +}
The mysterious udelay() needs a comment, because there is no way in
which the reader can otherwise work out why it is there.
> +static int tx4939_rng_data_read(struct hwrng *rng, u32 *buffer)
> +{
> + struct tx4939_rng *rngdev = container_of(rng, struct tx4939_rng, rng);
> +
> + rngdev->data_avail--;
> + *buffer = *((u32 *)&rngdev->databuf + rngdev->data_avail);
> + return sizeof(u32);
> +}
Concurrent callers can corrupt rngdev->data_avail ?
> +static int __init tx4939_rng_probe(struct platform_device *dev)
> +{
> + struct tx4939_rng *rngdev;
> + struct resource *r;
> + int i;
> +
> + r = platform_get_resource(dev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
> + if (!r)
> + return -EBUSY;
> + rngdev = devm_kzalloc(&dev->dev, sizeof(*rngdev), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!rngdev)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + if (!devm_request_mem_region(&dev->dev, r->start, resource_size(r),
> + dev_name(&dev->dev)))
> + return -EBUSY;
> + rngdev->base = devm_ioremap(&dev->dev, r->start, resource_size(r));
> + if (!rngdev->base)
> + return -EBUSY;
> +
> + rngdev->rng.name = dev_name(&dev->dev);
> + rngdev->rng.data_present = tx4939_rng_data_present;
> + rngdev->rng.data_read = tx4939_rng_data_read;
> +
> + local_irq_disable();
> + /* Reset RNG */
> + write_rng(TX4939_RNG_RCSR_RST, rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_RCSR);
> + write_rng(0, rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_RCSR);
> + /* Start RNG */
> + write_rng(TX4939_RNG_RCSR_ST, rngdev->base, TX4939_RNG_RCSR);
> + local_irq_enable();
> + /* drop first two results */
The comment doesn't provide the reason for doing this?
> + for (i = 0; i < 2; i++) {
> + rngdev->data_avail = 0;
> + if (!tx4939_rng_data_present(&rngdev->rng, 1))
> + return -EIO;
> + }
> +
> + platform_set_drvdata(dev, rngdev);
> + return hwrng_register(&rngdev->rng);
> +}
> +
> +static int __exit tx4939_rng_remove(struct platform_device *dev)
> +{
> + struct tx4939_rng *rngdev = platform_get_drvdata(dev);
> +
> + hwrng_unregister(&rngdev->rng);
> + platform_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static struct platform_driver tx4939_rng_driver = {
> + .driver = {
> + .name = "tx4939-rng",
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + },
> + .remove = tx4939_rng_remove,
> +};
> +
> +static int __init tx4939_rng_init(void)
> +{
> + return platform_driver_probe(&tx4939_rng_driver, tx4939_rng_probe);
> +}
> +
> +static void __exit tx4939_rng_exit(void)
> +{
> + platform_driver_unregister(&tx4939_rng_driver);
> +}
> +
> +module_init(tx4939_rng_init);
> +module_exit(tx4939_rng_exit);
> +
> +MODULE_DESCRIPTION("H/W Random Number Generator (RNG) driver for TX4939");
> +MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists