linux-kernel - Re: [dtc PATCH V2] Warn on node name unit-address presence/absence mismatch

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: <3D2FE31C-A6BB-4F70-9B3B-C55012CB56B3@codeaurora.org>
Date:	Thu, 26 Sep 2013 13:21:23 -0500
From:	Kumar Gala <galak@...eaurora.org>
To:	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>
Cc:	Jon Loeliger <jdl@....com>,
	David Gibson <david@...son.dropbear.id.au>,
	Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>, frowand.list@...il.com,
	Tomasz Figa <tomasz.figa@...il.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>,
	Rohit Vaswani <rvaswani@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [dtc PATCH V2] Warn on node name unit-address presence/absence mismatch


On Sep 19, 2013, at 12:54 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:

> From: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
> 
> ePAPR 1.1 section 2.2.1.1 "Node Name Requirements" specifies that any
> node that has a reg property must include a unit address in its name
> with value matching the first entry in its reg property. Conversely, if
> a node does not have a reg property, the node name must not include a
> unit address.
> 
> Implement a check for this. The code doesn't validate the format of the
> unit address; ePAPR implies this may vary from (containing bus) binding
> to binding, so doing so would be much more complex.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@...dia.com>
> ---
> v2: Implement the new checks separately, rather than as part of existing
>    checkes. downgrade from errors to warnings. Add tests.
> 
> Question: Do I need to make a special exception for the /memory node? I
> assume we do want to fix that too, so the answer is no. That will require
> removing the /memory node from skeleton.dtsi in the kernel though.
> ---
> checks.c                        | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
> tests/reg-without-unit-addr.dts | 10 ++++++++++
> tests/run_tests.sh              |  2 ++
> tests/unit-addr-without-reg.dts |  9 +++++++++
> 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tests/reg-without-unit-addr.dts
> create mode 100644 tests/unit-addr-without-reg.dts

What about the case of no reg but a ranges?

This pattern shows up on a lot (if not all) the PPC dts:

arch/powerpc/boot/dts/mpc8544ds.dts:

        board_soc: soc: soc8544@...00000 {
                ranges = <0x0 0x0 0xe0000000 0x100000>;
        };

- k

-- 
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum, hosted by The Linux Foundation

--
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/