linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH] of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply and remove

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAL_JsqJdp16D4svB8Y7jurNVdHzVgz8_pkOKBA6mFyhXkqWi6w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Jun 2018 12:23:01 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>
To:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>
Cc:     Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@...sulko.com>,
        Pantelis Antoniou <panto@...oniou-consulting.com>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] of: overlay: update phandle cache on overlay apply
 and remove

On Sun, Jun 17, 2018 at 10:03 AM,  <frowand.list@...il.com> wrote:
> From: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>
>
> A comment in the review of the patch adding the phandle cache said that
> the cache would have to be updated when modules are applied and removed.
> This patch implements the cache updates.
>
> Fixes: 0b3ce78e90fc ("of: cache phandle nodes to reduce cost of of_find_node_by_phandle()")
> Reported-by: Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>
> Suggested-by: Alan Tull <atull@...nel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Frank Rowand <frank.rowand@...y.com>
> ---
>
> Compiles for one configuration.
> NOT boot tested.
> Not run through my normal process to check for new warnings, etc.

I'm assuming you will resend a non-RFC version for me to apply.

I think it would be a bit better if callers didn't have to do free and
populate themselves, but just made an invalidate call (like a normal
cache) and re-populating the cache could happen on demand. Or if it
was done as a single call, you could just copy the old entries to the
new larger array. But maybe there would be a race condition in doing
that? In any case, all that could be a subsequent patch.

Rob