linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to the sram initializationi phase

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]

Date:	Fri, 30 Jan 2015 07:03:49 +0000
From:	"Yang, Wenyou" <Wenyou.Yang@...el.com>
To:	Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
	"Russell King - ARM Linux" <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC:	"Ferre, Nicolas" <Nicolas.FERRE@...el.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"sylvain.rochet@...secur.com" <sylvain.rochet@...secur.com>,
	"peda@...ntia.se" <peda@...ntia.se>,
	"sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com" 
	<sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
	"linux@...im.org.za" <linux@...im.org.za>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function
 to the sram initializationi phase

Hi  Alexandre,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alexandre Belloni [mailto:alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 11:09 PM
> To: Russell King - ARM Linux
> Cc: Yang, Wenyou; Ferre, Nicolas; linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-
> kernel@...r.kernel.org; sylvain.rochet@...secur.com; peda@...ntia.se;
> sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com; linux@...im.org.za
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/13] pm: at91: move the copying the sram function to
> the sram initializationi phase
> 
> Hi,
> 
> On 29/01/2015 at 11:28:00 +0000, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote :
> > On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 09:43:16AM +0800, Wenyou Yang wrote:
> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_AT91_SLOW_CLOCK
> > > -				/* copy slow_clock handler to SRAM, and call it */
> > > -				memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock,
> at91_slow_clock_sz);
> > > -#endif
> > >  				slow_clock(at91_pmc_base, at91_ramc_base[0],
> > >  					   at91_ramc_base[1],
> > >  					   at91_pm_data.memctrl);
> > > @@ -272,6 +268,9 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void)
> > >  	sram_pbase = gen_pool_virt_to_phys(sram_pool, sram_base);
> > >  	slow_clock = __arm_ioremap_exec(sram_pbase, at91_slow_clock_sz,
> > > false);
> > >
> > > +	/* Copy the slow_clock handler to SRAM */
> > > +	memcpy(slow_clock, at91_slow_clock, at91_slow_clock_sz);
> > > +
> >
> > Why is this code not using the fncpy() support for copying functions.
> 
> Indeed, this was done in the original version of the patch that I acked.
Yes, in the original version used the fncpy(), but it works not well for some SoCs.
Sorry for that, I forget to record it on the change log.

> 
> > Why is it not checking the return code from __arm_ioremap_exec() or
> > gen_pool_virt_to_phys() for failure?
> 
> gen_pool_virt_to_phys() will not fail as the chunk is allocated just before so it will
> necessarily be found in the list.
> 
> We need to reintroduce a check for slow_clock != NULL before fncpy() since it is
> moved out of its original if block.
> 
> --
> Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
> Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com

Best Regards,
Wenyou yang
--
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/