linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 11/14] staging: fsl-mc: add quirk handling for dpseci objects

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 20 Apr 2016 15:28:08 +0000
From:	Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>
To:	Horia Ioan Geanta Neag <horia.geanta@....com>,
	Jose Rivera <german.rivera@....com>
CC:	"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	"devel@...verdev.osuosl.org" <devel@...verdev.osuosl.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"agraf@...e.de" <agraf@...e.de>, "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
	Yang-Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 11/14] staging: fsl-mc: add quirk handling for dpseci
 objects < 4.0



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Horia Ioan Geanta Neag
> Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 6:42 AM
> To: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>; Jose Rivera <german.rivera@....com>
> Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org; devel@...verdev.osuosl.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org;
> agraf@...e.de; arnd@...db.de; Yang-Leo Li <leoyang.li@....com>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/14] staging: fsl-mc: add quirk handling for dpseci objects < 4.0
> 
> On 4/11/2016 7:50 PM, Stuart Yoder wrote:
> > From: Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@....com>
> >
> > dpseci objects < 4.0 are not coherent-- in spite of the fact
> > that the MC reports them to be coherent in certain versions.
> > Add a special case to set the no shareability flag for dpseci
> > objects < 4.0.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Horia Geanta <horia.geanta@....com>
> > (Stuart: reworded commit message, updated comment in patch)
> > Signed-off-by: Stuart Yoder <stuart.yoder@....com>
> 
> Do we really need this?
> First upstream dpsec driver will be for dpsec >= v4.0.

This has nothing to do with the dpsec driver, it's just trying
to be complete with potential MC firmware versions that
might be encountered.  There is supported MC firmware
(and example non-upstream Linux drivers) in customer hands
with dpsec < 4.0, and we are handling that case even if
encountering it is not likely (e.g. what if someone develops
their own driver?).

So let's keep this quirk for now.

Stuart