| 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: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 03:01:17 +0200
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
"Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...not-panic.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>,
Abhay Salunke <Abhay_Salunke@...l.com>,
Stefan Roese <sr@...x.de>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware loader: inform direct failure when udev
loader is disabled
On Tue, Jul 01, 2014 at 11:22:07AM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> At Tue, 1 Jul 2014 11:54:24 +0800,
> Ming Lei wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 1, 2014 at 7:30 AM, Luis R. Rodriguez
> > <mcgrof@...not-panic.com> wrote:
> > > From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...e.com>
> > >
> > > Now that the udev firmware loader is optional request_firmware()
> > > will not provide any information on the kernel ring buffer if
> > > direct firmware loading failed and udev firmware loading is disabled.
> > > If no information is needed request_firmware_direct() should be used
> > > for optional firmware, at which point drivers can take on the onus
> > > over informing of any failures, if udev firmware loading is disabled
> > > though we should at the very least provide some sort of information
> > > as when the udev loader was enabled by default back in the days.
> > >
> > > With this change with a simple firmware load test module [0]:
> > >
> > > Example output without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
> > >
> > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error -2
> > >
> > > Example without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
> > >
> > > platform fake-dev.0: Direct firmware load for fake.bin failed with error -2
> > > platform fake-dev.0: Falling back to user helper
> > >
> > > Without this change without FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK we get no output
> > > logged upon failure.
> > >
> > > [0] https://github.com/mcgrof/fake-firmware-test.git
> > >
> > > Cc: Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>
> > > Cc: Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>
> > > Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> > > Cc: Abhay Salunke <Abhay_Salunke@...l.com>
> > > Cc: Stefan Roese <sr@...x.de>
> > > Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
> > > Cc: Kay Sievers <kay@...y.org>
> > > Cc: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>
> > > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@...e.com>
> > > ---
> > >
> > > drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 12 ++++++++----
> > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> > > index 46ea5f4..23274d8 100644
> > > --- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> > > +++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
> > > @@ -101,8 +101,10 @@ static inline long firmware_loading_timeout(void)
> > > #define FW_OPT_NOWAIT (1U << 1)
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER
> > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER (1U << 2)
> > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN 0
> > > #else
> > > #define FW_OPT_USERHELPER 0
> > > +#define FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN (1U << 3)
> > > #endif
> > > #ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
> > > #define FW_OPT_FALLBACK FW_OPT_USERHELPER
> > > @@ -1116,10 +1118,11 @@ _request_firmware(const struct firmware **firmware_p, const char *name,
> > >
> > > ret = fw_get_filesystem_firmware(device, fw->priv);
> > > if (ret) {
> > > - if (opt_flags & FW_OPT_USERHELPER) {
> > > + if (opt_flags & (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER))
> > > dev_warn(device,
> > > - "Direct firmware load failed with error %d\n",
> > > - ret);
> > > + "Direct firmware load for %s failed with error %d\n",
> > > + name, ret);
> >
> > Maybe the warning can be always printed out since
> > (FW_OPT_FAIL_WARN | FW_OPT_USERHELPER) should be
> > always true.
>
> Yes, it'd be simpler. Let's reduce lines! :)
Actually we don't want to warn when request_firmware_direct() is used right? That's really what
I meant to upkeep while adding a warning when _direct() is not used. So how about
this as an ammendment:
diff --git a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
index 23274d8..4f6adf3 100644
--- a/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
+++ b/drivers/base/firmware_class.c
@@ -1180,7 +1180,6 @@ request_firmware(const struct firmware **firmware_p, const char *name,
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(request_firmware);
-#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
/**
* request_firmware: - load firmware directly without usermode helper
* @firmware_p: pointer to firmware image
@@ -1202,7 +1201,6 @@ int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **firmware_p,
return ret;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(request_firmware_direct);
-#endif
/**
* release_firmware: - release the resource associated with a firmware image
diff --git a/include/linux/firmware.h b/include/linux/firmware.h
index 67e5b80..5c41c5e 100644
--- a/include/linux/firmware.h
+++ b/include/linux/firmware.h
@@ -45,6 +45,8 @@ int request_firmware_nowait(
struct module *module, bool uevent,
const char *name, struct device *device, gfp_t gfp, void *context,
void (*cont)(const struct firmware *fw, void *context));
+int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
+ struct device *device);
void release_firmware(const struct firmware *fw);
#else
@@ -66,13 +68,12 @@ static inline void release_firmware(const struct firmware *fw)
{
}
-#endif
+static inline int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw,
+ const char *name,
+ struct device *device)
+{
+ return -EINVAL;
+}
-#ifdef CONFIG_FW_LOADER_USER_HELPER_FALLBACK
-int request_firmware_direct(const struct firmware **fw, const char *name,
- struct device *device);
-#else
-#define request_firmware_direct request_firmware
#endif
-
#endif
--
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