[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6ccea081-12a5-302f-331b-29ac06f3b228@linux.microsoft.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 08:48:36 -0700
From: Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>
To: Nayna Jain <nayna@...ux.ibm.com>, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org,
linux-efi@...r.kernel.org, linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>,
Jeremy Kerr <jk@...abs.org>,
Matthew Garret <matthew.garret@...ula.com>,
Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.ibm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Claudio Carvalho <cclaudio@...ux.ibm.com>,
George Wilson <gcwilson@...ux.ibm.com>,
Elaine Palmer <erpalmer@...ibm.com>,
Eric Ricther <erichte@...ux.ibm.com>,
Oliver O'Halloran <oohall@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/4] powerpc/powernv: Add OPAL API interface to access
secure variable
On 10/24/19 5:47 PM, Nayna Jain wrote:
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal-api.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal-api.h
> index 378e3997845a..c1f25a760eb1 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal-api.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal-api.h
> @@ -211,7 +211,10 @@
> #define OPAL_MPIPL_UPDATE 173
> #define OPAL_MPIPL_REGISTER_TAG 174
> #define OPAL_MPIPL_QUERY_TAG 175
> -#define OPAL_LAST 175
> +#define OPAL_SECVAR_GET 176
> +#define OPAL_SECVAR_GET_NEXT 177
> +#define OPAL_SECVAR_ENQUEUE_UPDATE 178
> +#define OPAL_LAST 178
Adjust indentation in the above #defines.
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal.h
> index a0cf8fba4d12..9986ac34b8e2 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/opal.h
> @@ -298,6 +298,13 @@ int opal_sensor_group_clear(u32 group_hndl, int token);
> int opal_sensor_group_enable(u32 group_hndl, int token, bool enable);
> int opal_nx_coproc_init(uint32_t chip_id, uint32_t ct);
>
> +int opal_secvar_get(const char *key, uint64_t key_len, u8 *data,
> + uint64_t *data_size);
> +int opal_secvar_get_next(const char *key, uint64_t *key_len,
> + uint64_t key_buf_size);
> +int opal_secvar_enqueue_update(const char *key, uint64_t key_len, u8 *data,
> + uint64_t data_size);
> +
Fix alignment of the parameters in the 2nd line.
Same comment in a few other files in this change set.
> +
> +static int opal_get_variable(const char *key, uint64_t ksize,
> + u8 *data, uint64_t *dsize)
> +{
> + int rc;
> +
> + if (!key || !dsize)
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + *dsize = cpu_to_be64(*dsize);
> +
> + rc = opal_secvar_get(key, ksize, data, dsize);
> +
> + *dsize = be64_to_cpu(*dsize);
Is it ok to update dsize even if return code (rc) from opal_secvar_get
is an error? Just wanted to confirm.
> +
> + *keylen = cpu_to_be64(*keylen);
> +
> + rc = opal_secvar_get_next(key, keylen, keybufsize);
> +
> + *keylen = be64_to_cpu(*keylen);
Same comment as above.
> +
> + set_secvar_ops(&opal_secvar_ops);
Does this set function return status?
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists