linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] firmware: helper functions for SMCCC v1.0 invocation conduit

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAN5uoS_h1T4hw7zpmqzLjTBN8_16JRgXnWGzVmaZ7ohhV6DfdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sun, 19 Apr 2020 17:51:54 +0200
From:   Etienne Carriere <etienne.carriere@...aro.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, james.morse@....com,
        michal.simek@...inx.com, richard.gong@...ux.intel.com,
        lorenzo.pieralisi@....com, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>,
        tee-dev@...ts.linaro.org, Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/6] firmware: helper functions for SMCCC v1.0
 invocation conduit

On Sun, 19 Apr 2020 at 17:05, Etienne Carriere
<etienne.carriere@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> +#define arm_smccc_1_0_invoke(...) ({                                   \
> +               enum arm_smccc_conduit conduit = arm_smccc_1_0_get_conduit(); \
> +               switch (conduit) {                                      \
> +               case SMCCC_CONDUIT_HVC:                                 \
> +                       arm_smccc_hvc(__VA_ARGS__);                     \
> +                       break;                                          \
> +               case SMCCC_CONDUIT_SMC:                                 \
> +                       arm_smccc_smc(__VA_ARGS__);                     \
> +                       break;                                          \
> +               default:                                                \
> +                       __fail_smccc_1_0(__VA_ARGS__);                  \
> +                       conduit = SMCCC_CONDUIT_NONE;                   \
> +               }                                                       \
> +               conduit;                                                \
> +       })

Checkpatch complains here (traces below) but I think this is a false positive
due to the line breaks in the macro definition.

WARNING: Possible switch case/default not preceded by break or
fallthrough comment
#231: FILE: include/linux/arm-smccc.h:415:
+ case SMCCC_CONDUIT_SMC: \

WARNING: Possible switch case/default not preceded by break or
fallthrough comment
#234: FILE: include/linux/arm-smccc.h:418:
+ default: \

Regards,
Etienne