linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] EDAC, altera: Fix peripheral warnings for Cyclone5

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:   Tue, 4 Apr 2017 09:28:08 -0500
From:   Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     mchehab@...nel.org, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] EDAC, altera: Fix peripheral warnings for Cyclone5

Hi Boris,

On 04/04/2017 04:59 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 03, 2017 at 02:01:06PM -0500, thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>> From: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
>>
>> The peripherals EDACs only exist on the Arria10 SoCFPGA. The Cyclone5
>> initialization has EDAC warnings when the peripherals aren't found
>> in the device tree. Fix by checking for Arria10 in the init functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Thor Thayer <thor.thayer@...ux.intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/edac/altera_edac.c | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
>> index 6421cc3..98e83f5 100644
>> --- a/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
>> +++ b/drivers/edac/altera_edac.c
>> @@ -1024,13 +1024,30 @@ static int __maybe_unused altr_init_memory_port(void __iomem *ioaddr, int port)
>>  	return ret;
>>  }
>>
>> +static int invalid_model(void)
>> +{
>> +	struct device_node *np = of_find_node_by_path("/");
>
> That needs to have its return value checked, of course.
>
Actually, some of the of_ functions have validity checking in them.  In 
this case, of_get_property() calls of_find_property() which returns NULL 
if np is 0 which is propagated back up to model so this code should be safe.

In the case of the of_node_put() below, the node is also checked for 
non-NULL so I should be OK there.

>> +	const char *model = of_get_property(np, "model", NULL);
>> +
>> +	of_node_put(np);
>> +	if (!model || strncmp(model, "Altera SOCFPGA Arria 10", 23) != 0)
>
> No need for the "!= 0"
>
OK. Thanks.

>> +		return -ENODEV;
>> +
>> +	return 0;
>> +}
>
> That function name "invalid_model" sounds like a boolean: is the model
> invalid. So you can simply return bools and not -ENODEV as the context
> you're using it is boolean.
>
Good point, thanks. I'll fix and re-submit.

Thanks for reviewing!