| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190910171601.GA12665@kroah.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 18:16:01 +0100
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Sheetal Tigadoli <sheetal.tigadoli@...adcom.com>
Cc: Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Michal Simek <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
Rajan Vaja <rajan.vaja@...inx.com>,
Scott Branden <scott.branden@...adcom.com>,
Ray Jui <ray.jui@...adcom.com>,
Vikram Prakash <vikram.prakash@...adcom.com>,
tee-dev@...ts.linaro.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: broadcom: add OP-TEE based BNXT f/w manager
On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 08:47:04PM +0530, Sheetal Tigadoli wrote:
> From: Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>
>
> This driver registers on TEE bus to interact with OP-TEE based
> BNXT firmware management modules
>
> Signed-off-by: Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>
> Signed-off-by: Sheetal Tigadoli <sheetal.tigadoli@...adcom.com>
> ---
> drivers/firmware/broadcom/Kconfig | 8 +
> drivers/firmware/broadcom/Makefile | 1 +
> drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c | 447 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> include/linux/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.h | 17 +
> 4 files changed, 473 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c
> create mode 100644 include/linux/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.h
>
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Kconfig b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Kconfig
> index 6468082..a846a21 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Kconfig
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Kconfig
> @@ -22,3 +22,11 @@ config BCM47XX_SPROM
> In case of SoC devices SPROM content is stored on a flash used by
> bootloader firmware CFE. This driver provides method to ssb and bcma
> drivers to read SPROM on SoC.
> +
> +config TEE_BNXT_FW
> + bool "Broadcom BNXT firmware manager"
> + depends on ARCH_BCM_IPROC && OPTEE
No ability to build with compile testing?
> + default ARCH_BCM_IPROC
> + help
> + This module help to manage firmware on Broadcom BNXT device. The module
> + registers on tee bus and invoke calls to manage firmware on BNXT device.
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Makefile b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Makefile
> index 72c7fdc..17c5061 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Makefile
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/Makefile
> @@ -1,3 +1,4 @@
> # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> obj-$(CONFIG_BCM47XX_NVRAM) += bcm47xx_nvram.o
> obj-$(CONFIG_BCM47XX_SPROM) += bcm47xx_sprom.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_TEE_BNXT_FW) += tee_bnxt_fw.o
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 00000000..89a48fd
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,447 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/*
> + * Copyright 2019 Broadcom.
> + */
> +
> +#include <linux/kernel.h>
> +#include <linux/module.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/tee_drv.h>
> +#include <linux/uuid.h>
> +
> +#include <linux/firmware/broadcom/tee_bnxt_fw.h>
> +
> +#define DRIVER_NAME "tee-bnxt-fw"
KBUILD_MODNAME?
> +#define MAX_SHM_MEM_SZ SZ_4M
Why?
> +
> +#define MAX_TEE_PARAM_ARRY_MEMB 4
> +
> +enum ta_cmd {
> +/*
> + * TA_CMD_BNXT_FASTBOOT - boot bnxt device by copying f/w into sram
> + *
> + * param[0] unused
> + * param[1] unused
> + * param[2] unused
> + * param[3] unused
> + *
> + * Result:
> + * TEE_SUCCESS - Invoke command success
> + * TEE_ERROR_ITEM_NOT_FOUND - Corrupt f/w image found on memory
> + */
> + TA_CMD_BNXT_FASTBOOT = 0,
> +
Please indent the comments too. As-is this is hard to read.
> +/*
> + * TA_CMD_BNXT_HEALTH_STATUS - to check health of bnxt device
> + *
> + * param[0] (out value) - value.a: health status
> + * param[1] unused
> + * param[2] unused
> + * param[3] unused
> + *
> + * Result:
> + * TEE_SUCCESS - Invoke command success
> + * TEE_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETERS - Incorrect input param
> + */
> + TA_CMD_BNXT_HEALTH_STATUS,
Should all of these have explicit values?
> +
> +/*
> + * TA_CMD_BNXT_HANDSHAKE - to check bnxt device is booted
> + *
> + * param[0] (in value) - value.a: max timeout value
> + * param[0] (out value) - value.a: boot status
> + * param[1] unused
> + * param[2] unused
> + * param[3] unused
> + *
> + * Result:
> + * TEE_SUCCESS - Invoke command success
> + * TEE_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETERS - Incorrect input param
> + */
> + TA_CMD_BNXT_HANDSHAKE,
> +
> +/*
> + * TA_CMD_BNXT_COPY_COREDUMP - copy the core dump into shm
> + *
> + * param[0] (in value) - value.a: offset at which data to be copied from
> + * value.b: size of the data
> + * param[1] unused
> + * param[2] unused
> + * param[3] unused
> + *
> + * Result:
> + * TEE_SUCCESS - Invoke command success
> + * TEE_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETERS - Incorrect input param
> + * TEE_ERROR_ITEM_NOT_FOUND - Corrupt core dump
> + */
> + TA_CMD_BNXT_COPY_COREDUMP,
> +
> +/*
> + * TA_CMD_BNXT_FW_UPGRADE - upgrade the bnxt firmware
> + *
> + * param[0] (in value) - value.a: size of the f/w image
> + * param[1] unused
> + * param[2] unused
> + * param[3] unused
> + *
> + * Result:
> + * TEE_SUCCESS - Invoke command success
> + * TEE_ERROR_BAD_PARAMETERS - Incorrect input param
> + */
> + TA_CMD_BNXT_FW_UPGRADE,
> +};
> +
> +/**
> + * struct tee_bnxt_fw_private - OP-TEE bnxt private data
> + * @dev: OP-TEE based bnxt device.
> + * @ctx: OP-TEE context handler.
> + * @session_id: TA session identifier.
> + */
> +struct tee_bnxt_fw_private {
> + struct device *dev;
Why is the pointer back needed?
> + struct tee_context *ctx;
> + u32 session_id;
> + struct tee_shm *fw_shm_pool;
> +};
> +
> +static struct tee_bnxt_fw_private pvt_data;
> +
> +static inline void prepare_args(int cmd,
> + struct tee_ioctl_invoke_arg *inv_arg,
> + struct tee_param *param)
> +{
> + memset(inv_arg, 0, sizeof(*inv_arg));
> + memset(param, 0, (MAX_TEE_PARAM_ARRY_MEMB * sizeof(*param)));
> +
> + inv_arg->func = cmd;
> + inv_arg->session = pvt_data.session_id;
> + inv_arg->num_params = MAX_TEE_PARAM_ARRY_MEMB;
> +
> + /* Fill invoke cmd params */
> + switch (cmd) {
> + case TA_CMD_BNXT_HEALTH_STATUS:
> + param[0].attr = TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_VALUE_OUTPUT;
> + break;
> + case TA_CMD_BNXT_HANDSHAKE:
> + param[0].attr = TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_VALUE_INOUT;
> + break;
> + case TA_CMD_BNXT_COPY_COREDUMP:
> + case TA_CMD_BNXT_FW_UPGRADE:
> + param[0].attr = TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_MEMREF_INOUT;
> + param[0].u.memref.shm = pvt_data.fw_shm_pool;
> + param[0].u.memref.size = MAX_SHM_MEM_SZ;
> + param[0].u.memref.shm_offs = 0;
> + param[1].attr = TEE_IOCTL_PARAM_ATTR_TYPE_VALUE_INPUT;
> + break;
> + case TA_CMD_BNXT_FASTBOOT:
> + default:
> + /* Nothing to do */
> + break;
> + }
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * tee_bnxt_fw_load() - Load the bnxt firmware
> + * Uses an OP-TEE call to start a secure
> + * boot process.
> + * Returns 0 on success, negative errno otherwise.
> + */
> +int tee_bnxt_fw_load(void)
> +{
> + int ret = 0;
> + struct tee_ioctl_invoke_arg inv_arg;
> + struct tee_param param[MAX_TEE_PARAM_ARRY_MEMB];
> +
> + if (!pvt_data.ctx)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> + prepare_args(TA_CMD_BNXT_FASTBOOT, &inv_arg, param);
> +
> + ret = tee_client_invoke_func(pvt_data.ctx, &inv_arg, param);
> + if ((ret < 0) || (inv_arg.ret != 0)) {
> + dev_err(pvt_data.dev, "TA_CMD_BNXT_LOAD invoke err: %x\n",
> + (ret < 0) ? ret : inv_arg.ret);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(tee_bnxt_fw_load);
Why are you exporting symbols for a single file? What uses these?
This feels really wrong, are you sure this all is correct?
I stopped reading here :)
thanks,
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists