linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 01/13] scpi: Add vendor_send_message to enable access to vendor commands

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: <26c18a0c-ee62-3159-e10b-6b0e5c28fb56@arm.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Aug 2016 11:39:15 +0100
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, khilman@...libre.com,
        heiko@...ech.de, wxt@...k-chips.com, frank.wang@...k-chips.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/13] scpi: Add vendor_send_message to enable access to
 vendor commands



On 19/08/16 09:00, Neil Armstrong wrote:
> On 08/18/2016 05:53 PM, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 18/08/16 11:10, Neil Armstrong wrote:
>>> Adds an optional vendor_send_message to the scpi to enable sending
>>> vendor platform specific commands to the SCP firmware.
>>>
>>
>> I don't see any users of vendor_send_message in this series, so I prefer
>> it to be dropped and introduced when required.
>>
>> Also I had a different view on how to introduce this[1]. I would rather
>> wait until the requirement comes that enables us to make use of it.
>> Looks like you took parts of it and introduces vendor_send_message
>> allowing users to send any data which I don't like especially without
>> knowing how will it be (ab)used.
>>
>
> Hi Sudeep,
>
> Indeed, I won't ask you to merge patches 1, 8 and 9, they need refactoring and
> a separate patchset.
>

Ah OK,then better if you put then at the end. Otherwise it makes it
difficult to review.

> Vendor commands are not necessary for Amlogic, this is a nice to have
> since they have a "user" command that can be extended by a firmware
> loaded by u-boot.
>

Good :)

> Could you review the following patches and I'll post a reduced v2
> ASAP.
>

Yes I was doing that yesterday, sorry got distracted. I will continue today.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep