linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers, char: add U-Boot bootcount driver

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: <20111206215056.GD14154@pengutronix.de>
Date:	Tue, 6 Dec 2011 22:50:56 +0100
From:	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
To:	Heiko Schocher <hs@...x.de>
Cc:	Wolfgang Denk <wd@...x.de>, Vitaly Bordug <vbordug@...mvista.com>,
	devicetree-discuss@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers, char: add U-Boot bootcount driver

Hi Heiko,

> >> This driver provides read/write access to the U-Boot bootcounter
> >> through PROC FS and/or sysFS file.
> > 
> > Why ProcFS? Why ProcFS and/or SysFS? Which has priority? Why not /dev?
> 
> I drop the ProcFS support for v2.

Don't bother. This approach starts from the wrong side.

> 
> >> The bootcountregister gets configured via DTS.
> >> for example on the enbw_cmc board:
> >>
> >> bootcount@...3060 {
> >>                   compatible = "uboot,bootcount";
> > 
> > No. I assume you are not the vendor of what is at 0x23060, the actual device.
> > Only the device must be encoded in the compatible-entry which then implies the
> > bootcount functionality. Also, keep in mind that your solution should be
> > generic for bootloaders.
> 
> So I should call it compatible = "generic, bootcount" ?

Nope, you should give it the name of the device. Remember that 'compatible' is
no 1:1 replacement for platform_driver-binding. Check
http://devicetree.org/Device_Tree_Usage, especially the sections about the
compatible-property.

bootcount itself is not a device. It is a feature of certain devices. And that
needs to be implemented; possibly generic enough that it can work for register
based, i2c based, and so forth, accesses.

Regards,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)