linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] soc: qcom: socinfo: Expose image information

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]

Message-ID: <20190301195140.GE27005@builder>
Date:   Fri, 1 Mar 2019 11:51:40 -0800
From:   Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
To:     Vaishali Thakkar <vaishali.thakkar@...aro.org>
Cc:     andy.gross@...aro.org, david.brown@...aro.org,
        gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rafael@...nel.org, vkoul@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] soc: qcom: socinfo: Expose image information

On Sun 24 Feb 22:50 PST 2019, Vaishali Thakkar wrote:
> +#define IMAGE_SHOW_OEM(attr)						 \
> +static int show_ ##attr## _oem(struct seq_file *seq, void *p)		 \
> +{									 \
> +	struct smem_image_version *image_version = seq->private;	 \
> +	seq_puts(seq, image_version->oem);				 \
> +	seq_puts(seq, "\n");						 \
> +	return 0;							 \
> +}									 \
> +static int open_ ##attr## _oem(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)	 \
> +{									 \
> +	return single_open(file, show_ ##attr## _oem, inode->i_private); \
> +}									 \
> +									 \
> +static const struct file_operations qcom_ ##attr## _oem_ops = {		 \
> +	.open = open_ ##attr## _oem,					 \
> +	.read = seq_read,						 \
> +	.llseek = seq_lseek,						 \
> +	.release = single_release,					 \
> +}
> +
> +#define DEBUGFS_IMAGE_OEM(fname, attr, index)				 \
> +debugfs_create_file(__stringify(fname), 0400, qcom_socinfo->attr,	 \
> +		    &smem_image_version[index], &qcom_ ##attr## _oem_ops)
> +
> +#define IMAGE_SHOW(name)	  \
> +	IMAGE_SHOW_NAME(name);    \
> +	IMAGE_SHOW_VARIANT(name); \
> +	IMAGE_SHOW_OEM(name)	  \
> +
> +IMAGE_SHOW(boot);

Given that you pass &smem_image_version[index] as "data" it seems that
these instances will only differ in the function name. So you should be
able to have one set of these functions to handle all the images.

> +IMAGE_SHOW(tz);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(rpm);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(apps);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(mpss);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(adsp);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(cnss);
> +IMAGE_SHOW(video);
> +

Regards,
Bjorn