linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware

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: <20140626192107.GB24337@kroah.com>
Date:	Thu, 26 Jun 2014 15:21:07 -0400
From:	Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc:	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>,
	chunkeey@...glemail.com, leedom@...lsio.com, cocci@...teme.lip6.fr,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] drivers: expand usage of request_firmware_direct()

On Thu, Jun 26, 2014 at 06:18:05PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Tue, 24 Jun 2014 15:39:40 -0700,
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > 
> > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
> > 
> > Takashi added request_firmware_direct() via bba3a87e9 through v3.14-rc1
> > which avoids the unnecessary delay introduced by using the udev firmware
> > loader in case the first try failed when loading we know loading "firmware"
> > is optional. The first use case was for microcode update but if drivers are
> > using it for optional configuration updates, custom EEPROMs, and other
> > junk other than firmware that should apply as well as good use cases,
> > specially if the driver already had a first phase in which it loaded
> > the first required firmware. While reviewing one driver I figured it'd
> > be best to try to give formalizing a check with SmPL. This isn't perfect
> > it had 1 false possitive drivers/fmc/fmc-fakedev.c on the entire kernel
> > run but my hope is this can be extended a bit more to build more
> > confidence, and then perhaps stuff it as a coccicheck.
> > 
> > I suppose this will not be required once and if we remove
> > CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER. Is that ever going away for good? I know
> > there was a recent attempt to remove the udev loader support but
> > it was unclear if the special alternative helper support would be
> > removed upstream from the kernel.
> 
> Actually a few weeks ago I sent a patch to make request_firmware()
> with usermode helper explicitly to be used by some drivers (like
> dell-rbu).  I hope Greg took it for 3.17.  Once when this patch is in,
> distros can turn off the usermode helper fallback gracefully, so no
> ugly timeout issue shouldn't happen.

I'll take that in a few days, been traveling at the moment...

thanks,

greg k-h
--
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/