| 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
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2012 11:39:56 +0900
From: jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com
To: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...6.fr>,
Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com>,
Kyungmin Park <kyungmin.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Exynos : Add support for Exynos random number generator
Hi, Stephen.
Thanks for quick reviewing.
On 2012년 06월 21일 09:47, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> On 06/20/12 01:22, Jonghwa Lee wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig b/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
>> index f45dad3..8220026 100644
>> --- a/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
>> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/Kconfig
>> @@ -263,3 +263,15 @@ config HW_RANDOM_PSERIES
>> module will be called pseries-rng.
>>
>> If unsure, say Y.
>> +
>> +config HW_RANDOM_EXYNOS
>> + tristate "EXYNOS Random Number Generator support"
>> + depends on HW_RANDOM && ARCH_EXYNOS4
>
> I don't see how this actually depends on ARCH_EXYNOS4 to be compiled. I
> obviously wouldn't want to compile in this driver if I didn't have the
> hardware but the driver seems generic enough to be compiled anywhere
> (e.g. in an x86 allmodconfig). I suppose you need to add HAS_IOMEM though.
>
I just add this condition only because EXYNOS series has PRNG in it
generally. But, I'll fix it as you mentioned.
>> + ---help---
>> + This driver provides kernel-side support for the Random Number
>> + Generator hardware found on EXYNOS SOCs.
>
> Why is 'random number generator' capitalized?
>
I'll modify it.
>> diff --git a/drivers/char/hw_random/exynos-rng.c b/drivers/char/hw_random/exynos-rng.c
>> new file mode 100644
>> index 0000000..b58a28b
>> --- /dev/null
>> +++ b/drivers/char/hw_random/exynos-rng.c
>> @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
> [snip]
>> +#include <linux/clk.h>
>> +#include <linux/pm_runtime.h>
>> +
>> +#define EXYNOS_PRNG_STATUS_OFFSET 0x10
>> +#define EXYNOS_PRNG_SEED_OFFSET 0x140
>> +#define EXYNOS_PRNG_OUT1_OFFSET 0x160
>> +#define SEED_SETTING_DONE BIT(1)
>> +#define PRNG_START 0x18
>> +#define PRNG_DONE BIT(5)
>
> Please consistently use tabs or spaces here between the '#define' and
> the name.
>
Okay,
>> +
>> +struct exynos_rng {
>> + struct device *dev;
>> + struct hwrng rng;
>> + void __iomem *mem;
>> + struct clk *clk;
>> +};
>> +
>> +static u32 exynos_rng_readl(void __iomem *base, u32 offset)
>> +{
>> + return __raw_readl(base + offset);
>> +}
>
> There seems to be a tab here? Also, why don't these read/write functions
> take the exynos_rng struct so that you don't have to pass the base
> pointer. That would make these functions more useful than just being a
> wrapper around __raw_{readl,writel}()
>
> u32 exynos_rng_readl(struct exynos_rng *rng, u32 offset)
> void exynos_rng_writel(struct exynos_rng *rng, u32 val, u32 offset)
>
Okay, I'll apply it.
>> +
>> +static void exynos_rng_writel(u32 val, void __iomem *base, u32 offset)
>> +{
>> + __raw_writel(val, base + offset);
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_init(struct hwrng *rng)
>> +{
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng = container_of(rng,
>> + struct exynos_rng, rng);
>> + int i;
>> + int ret = 0;
>> + u32 PRND_SEED[5];
>> +
>> + pm_runtime_put_noidle(exynos_rng->dev);
>> + pm_runtime_get_sync(exynos_rng->dev);
>
> This looks very odd. Why are you calling pm_runtime_put_noidle()?
>
When this callback function is called, the status of power state is
'suspended' and use_count is 1. To perform pm_runtime_get_sync()
correctly, it requires to have 'suspended' status and use_count is 0.
Thus i force to decrease use_count only with using
pm_runtime_put_noidle. I know it looks odd, but i couldn't find better
way. Otherwise it can use clk_enable() directly, but i think that it
isn't good neither.
>> +
>> + for (i = 0 ; i < 5 ; i++) {
>> + PRND_SEED[i] = i;
>> + exynos_rng_writel(PRND_SEED[i], exynos_rng->mem,
>> + EXYNOS_PRNG_SEED_OFFSET + 4*i);
>> + }
>
> Is this just writing 0,1,2,3,4 to registers? What is the array for?
>
I'll modify it.
>> +
>> + if (!(exynos_rng_readl(exynos_rng->mem, EXYNOS_PRNG_STATUS_OFFSET)
>> + & SEED_SETTING_DONE))
>> + ret = -EIO;
>> +
>> + pm_runtime_put(exynos_rng->dev);
>> + pm_runtime_get_noresume(exynos_rng->dev);
>> +
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_read(struct hwrng *rng, void *buf,
>> + size_t max, bool wait)
>> +{
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng = container_of(rng,
>> + struct exynos_rng, rng);
>> + u32 *data = buf;
>> + u32 status = 0;
>
> Drop this assignment here.
>
Okay,
>> +
>> + pm_runtime_get_sync(exynos_rng->dev);
>> + exynos_rng_writel(PRNG_START, exynos_rng->mem, 0);
>> +
>> + while (!status) {
>> + status = exynos_rng_readl(exynos_rng->mem,
>> + EXYNOS_PRNG_STATUS_OFFSET);
>> + status &= PRNG_DONE;
>> + }
>
> And make this into a do while with a cpu_relax() thrown in there.
>
Okay
>> +
>> + exynos_rng_writel(PRNG_DONE, exynos_rng->mem,
>> + EXYNOS_PRNG_STATUS_OFFSET);
>> +
>> + *data = exynos_rng_readl(exynos_rng->mem,
>> + EXYNOS_PRNG_OUT1_OFFSET);
>> +
>> + pm_runtime_put(exynos_rng->dev);
>> + return 4;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int __init exynos_rng_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> __devinit
>
Okay,
>> +{
>> + int ret;
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng;
>> + struct resource *res;
>> +
>> + exynos_rng = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(struct exynos_rng),
>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>> + if (!exynos_rng)
>> + return -ENOMEM;
>> +
>> + exynos_rng->dev = &pdev->dev;
>> + exynos_rng->rng.name = "exynos";
>> + exynos_rng->rng.init = exynos_init;
>> + exynos_rng->rng.read = exynos_read;
>> + exynos_rng->clk = clk_get(NULL, "secss");
>
> Can you please pass &pdev->dev to clk_get()?
>
But, this clock is not only used in PRNG. Should i put it in?
>> + if (!exynos_rng->clk) {
>
> NULL is a valid clock. Please check for IS_ERR() only. Also you may want
> to use devm_clk_get().
>
Okay
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Couldn't get clock.\n");
>> + return -ENOENT;
>> + }
>> +
>> + res = platform_get_resource(pdev, IORESOURCE_MEM, 0);
>> + if (!res) {
>> + clk_put(exynos_rng->clk);
>> + return -ENODEV;
>> + }
>> +
>> + exynos_rng->mem = devm_ioremap(&pdev->dev, res->start,
>> + resource_size(res));
>
> It might be a good idea to use devm_request_and_ioremap() here instead.
>
Okay,
>> + if (!exynos_rng->mem) {
>> + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Ioremap failed.\n");
>> + return -EBUSY;
>> + }
>> +
>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, exynos_rng);
>> +
>> + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
>> + pm_runtime_irq_safe(&pdev->dev);
>
> It doesn't seem like you need to run runtime PM calls in irq context.
> Why is this here?
>
I think i misunderstood to use pm_runtime_sync(). I understood it is
needed for using pm_runtime_sync() for any condition. I'll remove it.
>> +
>> + ret = hwrng_register(&exynos_rng->rng);
>> + if (ret) {
>> + clk_put(exynos_rng->clk);
>> + return ret;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int __exit exynos_rng_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>
> __devexit
>
Okay,
>> +{
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +
>> + hwrng_unregister(&exynos_rng->rng);
>> + clk_put(exynos_rng->clk);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_rng_runtime_suspend(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +
>> + clk_disable(exynos_rng->clk);
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int exynos_rng_runtime_resume(struct device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev);
>> + struct exynos_rng *exynos_rng = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +
>> + clk_enable(exynos_rng->clk);
>
> Please use clk_prepare_enable()/clk_disable_unprepare() so we don't have
> to convert this driver later.
>
Okay,
>> +
>> +static const struct dev_pm_ops exynos_rng_pm_ops = {
>> + .runtime_suspend = exynos_rng_runtime_suspend,
>> + .runtime_resume = exynos_rng_runtime_resume,
>> +};
>
> You should use something like UNIVERSAL_DEV_PM_OPS here so that you can
> #ifdef CONFIG_PM the runtime suspend/resume functions. If CONFIG_PM=n
> does this driver work? I wonder if the clocks are assumed to be on in
> that case?
>
Okay, I'll fix it.
>> +
>> +static struct platform_driver exynos_rng_driver = {
>> + .driver = {
>> + .name = "exynos-rng",
>> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
>> + .pm = &exynos_rng_pm_ops,
>> + },
>> + .probe = exynos_rng_probe,
>> + .remove = exynos_rng_remove,
>
> __devexit_p()
>
Okay
Regards.
--
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