linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v11 2/4] tee: generic TEE subsystem

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:   Wed, 31 Aug 2016 14:47:45 +0200
From:   Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
To:     "Andrew F. Davis" <afd@...com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, valentin.manea@...wei.com,
        jean-michel.delorme@...com, emmanuel.michel@...com,
        javier@...igon.com,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 2/4] tee: generic TEE subsystem

On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 02:29:45PM -0500, Andrew F. Davis wrote:
> On 08/22/2016 08:00 AM, Jens Wiklander wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Unprivileged devices in the in the lower half range and privileged
> 
>                                 ^^ in the in the
> [snip]
> 
> > +
> > +	rc = alloc_chrdev_region(&tee_devt, 0, TEE_NUM_DEVICES, "tee");
> > +	if (rc < 0) {
> 
> if (rc) ?
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > + * Memory allocated as global shared memory is automatically freed when the
> > + * TEE file pointer is closed. The @flags field uses the bits defined by
> > + * TEE_SHM_* above. TEE_SHM_MAPPED must currently always be set. If
> 
>              ^^^ not really above anymore, out of file now looks like
> 
> > + * TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF global shared memory will be allocated and associated
> > + * with a dma-buf handle, else driver private memory.
> > + *
> > + * @returns a pointer to 'struct tee_shm'
> 
> Doesn't say anything, is this really needed?
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > +/**
> > + * struct tee_shm_pool_mem_info - holds information needed to create a shared
> > + * memory pool
> > + * @vaddr:	Virtual address of start of pool
> > + * @paddr:	Physical address of start of pool
> > + * @size:	Size in bytes of the pool
> > + */
> > +struct tee_shm_pool_mem_info {
> > +	unsigned long vaddr;
> > +	unsigned long paddr;
> 
> phys_addr_t paddr; ?

Thanks for taking the time to review this. I'll address all your
comments here in the next version of the patch set.

--
Jens