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: <55DDF2A0.5010404@mentor.com>
Date:	Wed, 26 Aug 2015 12:08:48 -0500
From:	Nathan Lynch <Nathan_Lynch@...tor.com>
To:	Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
CC:	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <ohad@...ery.com>,
	<devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...inux.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/4] remoteproc: debugfs: Add ability to boot remote
 processor using debugfs

On 08/26/2015 08:08 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)

The commit message should describe why this is needed...


> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> index 9d30809..9620962 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_debugfs.c
> @@ -88,8 +88,33 @@ static ssize_t rproc_state_read(struct file *filp, char __user *userbuf,
>  	return simple_read_from_buffer(userbuf, count, ppos, buf, i);
>  }
>  
> +static ssize_t rproc_state_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *userbuf,
> +				 size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
> +{
> +	struct rproc *rproc = filp->private_data;
> +	char buf[2];
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = copy_from_user(buf, userbuf, 1);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return -EFAULT;
> +
> +	switch (buf[0]) {
> +	case '1':
> +		ret = rproc_boot(rproc);
> +		if (ret)
> +			dev_warn(&rproc->dev, "Boot failed: %d\n", ret);
> +		break;
> +	default:
> +		rproc_shutdown(rproc);
> +	}
> +
> +	return count;
> +}

... and I suggest that the user interface be reconsidered.  If '1' means
"boot" and literally anything else means "shut down" then you can't add
operations in the future without potentially breaking things.

--
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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ