linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: qcom: q6v5-pil: add SCM probe dependency

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:   Tue, 9 Oct 2018 10:02:33 -0700
From:   Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Sibi Sankar <sibis@...eaurora.org>,
        Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-soc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] remoteproc: qcom: q6v5-pil: add SCM probe dependency

On Mon, Oct 08, 2018 at 11:21:25PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> On Mon 08 Oct 19:08 PDT 2018, Brian Norris wrote:
> 
> > Similar to qcom_q6v5_pas and qcom_wcnss drivers, probe will fail if SCM
> > is not up.
> > 
> 
> Thanks Brian, this dependency was introduced with the memory ownership
> support.

That's a good point. I'm actually not that familiar with this particular
driver--I was just trying to resolve an OOPS I saw while bringing this
driver up--but that does look correct.

> I applied it with an updated conditional to make it explicit that it
> related to need_mem_protection, updated the commit message to describe
> actual relationship to the memory protection mechanism and added a
> Fixes: tag.

Your version looks good, thanks.

> Don't we also need to add the ability to disable need_mem_protection
> when we're running ATF?

I'm not sure exactly, but FWIW I'm running some form of ATF on SDM845
and I'm running with 'needs_memory_protection' (hence, this patch).

Regards,
Brian