linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] soc: brcmstb: Only register SoC device on STB platforms

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:   Fri, 12 Jan 2018 10:21:43 -0800
From:   Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net>
To:     Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Brian Norris <computersforpeace@...il.com>,
        Gregory Fong <gregory.0xf0@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        ARM-SoC Maintainers <arm@...nel.org>,
        Broadcom Kernel Feedback List 
        <bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ARM Mailing List <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: brcmstb: Only register SoC device on STB platforms

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 10:19 AM, Olof Johansson <olof@...om.net> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 7:27 AM, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/01/18 12:58, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 12:12:11PM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 12/01/18 11:39, Sudeep Holla wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 09/01/18 14:54, Thierry Reding wrote:
>>>>>> From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After moving the SoC device initialization to an early initcall in
>>>>>> commit f780429adfbc ("soc: brcmstb: biuctrl: Move to early_initcall"),
>>>>>> the Broadcom STB SoC device is registered on all platforms if support
>>>>>> for the device is enabled in the kernel configuration.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This causes an additional SoC device to appear on platforms that already
>>>>>> register a native one. In case of Tegra the STB SoC device is registered
>>>>>> as soc0 (with totally meaningless content in the sysfs attributes) and
>>>>>> causes various scripts and programs to fail because they don't know how
>>>>>> to parse that data.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To fix this, duplicate the check from brcmstb_soc_device_early_init()
>>>>>> that already prevents the code from doing anything nonsensical on non-
>>>>>> STB platforms.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Fixes: f780429adfbc ("soc: brcmstb: biuctrl: Move to early_initcall")
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>  drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/common.c | 5 +++++
>>>>>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/common.c b/drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/common.c
>>>>>> index 781ada62d0a3..4fe1cb73b39a 100644
>>>>>> --- a/drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/common.c
>>>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/common.c
>>>>>> @@ -89,8 +89,13 @@ early_initcall(brcmstb_soc_device_early_init);
>>>>>>  static int __init brcmstb_soc_device_init(void)
>>>>>>  {
>>>>>>    struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
>>>>>> +  struct device_node *sun_top_ctrl;
>>>>>>    struct soc_device *soc_dev;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +  sun_top_ctrl = of_find_matching_node(NULL, sun_top_ctrl_match);
>>>>>> +  if (!sun_top_ctrl)
>>>>>> +          return -ENODEV;
>>>>>> +
>>>>>
>>>>> missing of_node_put(sun_top_ctrl) ? or am I missing to see that elsewhere ?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Further, I still the error messags on my Juno with this patch applied. I
>>>> fail to see how this patch prevents brcmstb_biuctrl_init which is
>>>> early_initcall in drivers/soc/bcm/brcmstb/biuctrl.c getting called ?
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I understand. There's no way we can prevent the early
>>> initcall from running. The point here is to prevent it from running code
>>> that shouldn't be run on a platform.
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for missing the context, I was referring [1]
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Sudeep
>>
>> [1] [1] https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=151568158127806&w=2
>
>
> Do we have an incremental patch coming, or should I revert this?

Oh, d'oh. Just noticed the 3-patch series.

Acks from the involved parties would be appreciated before I apply.


-Olof