[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160713214752.GF6239@wotan.suse.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:47:52 +0200
From: "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, ming.lei@...onical.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mmarek@...e.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, markivx@...eaurora.org,
stephen.boyd@...aro.org, zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
broonie@...nel.org, tiwai@...e.de, johannes@...solutions.net,
chunkeey@...glemail.com, hauke@...ke-m.de,
jwboyer@...oraproject.org, dmitry.torokhov@...il.com,
dwmw2@...radead.org, jslaby@...e.com,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, luto@...capital.net,
fengguang.wu@...el.com, rpurdie@...ys.net,
j.anaszewski@...sung.com, Abhay_Salunke@...l.com,
Julia.Lawall@...6.fr, Gilles.Muller@...6.fr, nicolas.palix@...g.fr,
teg@...m.no, dhowells@...hat.com,
martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com, nbd@....name,
mark.rutland@....com, robh+dt@...nel.org,
arend.vanspriel@...adcom.com, dev@...sin.me, kvalo@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:56:44AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:54:16PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> > The firmware API has had some issues a while ago, some of this is
> > not well documented, and its still hard to grasp. This documents
> > some of these issues, adds SmPL grammar rules to enable us to hunt
> > for issues, and annotations to help us with our effort to finally
> > compartamentalize that pesky usermode helper.
> >
> > Previously this was just one patch, the grammar rule to help
> > find request firmware API users on init or probe, this series
> > extends that effort with usermode helper grammar rules, and some
> > annotations and documentation on the firmware_class driver to
> > avoid further issues. Documenting the usermode helper and making
> > it clear why we cannot remove it is important for analysis for
> > the next series which adds the new flexible sysdata firmware API.
> >
> > This series depends on the coccicheck series which enables
> > annotations on coccinelle patches to require a specific
> > version of coccinelle [0], as such coordination with Michal is
> > in order.
>
> Michal is out until July 11, and upon further thought such coordination
> is not need, the annotation is in place as comments and as such
> merging this now won't have any negative effects other than the version
> check. Also the patches in question for the coccicheck change are all
> acked now and I expect them to be merged anyway.
>
> Which tree should firmware changes go through ?
>
> > This series is also further extended next with the new sydata
> > API, the full set of changes is available on my linux-next tree [1].
> >
> > Perhaps now a good time to discuss -- if 0-day should enable the rule
> > scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci to be called on
> > every 0-day iteration, it runs rather fast and it should help police
> > against avoiding futher explicit users of the usermode helper.
>
> And if we are going to merge this anyone oppose enabling hunting
> for further explicit users of the usermode helper using grammar through
> 0-day ?
*Poke*
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists