linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 11/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when changing FW image

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: <4ab6d7ac-905b-494e-cce7-cb8a697decb7@st.com>
Date:   Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:52:48 +0200
From:   Arnaud POULIQUEN <arnaud.pouliquen@...com>
To:     Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>,
        <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>, <ohad@...ery.com>
CC:     <loic.pallardy@...com>, <s-anna@...com>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <corbet@....net>,
        <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/14] remoteproc: Deal with synchronisation when
 changing FW image



On 4/24/20 10:01 PM, Mathieu Poirier wrote:
> This patch prevents the firmware image from being displayed or changed
> when the remoteproc core is synchronising with a remote processor. This
> is needed since there is no guarantee about the nature of the firmware
> image that is loaded by the external entity.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
> index 7f8536b73295..cdd322a6ecfa 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
> @@ -13,9 +13,20 @@
>  static ssize_t firmware_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
>  			  char *buf)
>  {
> +	ssize_t ret;
>  	struct rproc *rproc = to_rproc(dev);
>  
> -	return sprintf(buf, "%s\n", rproc->firmware);
> +	/*
> +	 * In most instances there is no guarantee about the firmware
> +	 * that was loaded by the external entity.  As such simply don't
> +	 * print anything.
> +	 */
> +	if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc))
> +		ret = sprintf(buf, "\n");

A default name is provided in sysfs if no firmware is started/synchronised on boot.

IMO providing an empty name here could be confusing.
Perhaps a refactoring of this sysfs entry would be nice:
 - Normal boot (no firmware loaded) : empty name instead of a default name
 - auto_boot: name provided by the platform driver or default name ( current implementation)
 - synchronization: a predefined name such as Default, unknown, External, None,...   

> +	else
> +		ret = sprintf(buf, "%s\n", rproc->firmware);
> +
> +	return ret;
>  }
>  
>  /* Change firmware name via sysfs */
> @@ -39,6 +50,17 @@ static ssize_t firmware_store(struct device *dev,
>  		goto out;
>  	}
>  
> +	/*
> +	 * There is no point in trying to change the firmware if loading the
> +	 * image of the remote processor is done by another entity.
> +	 */
> +	if (rproc_needs_syncing(rproc)) {
> +		dev_err(dev,
> +			"can't change firmware while synchronising with MCU\n");

I don't know if you decide to keep "MCU" or not. If not the case
you have also some other instances in your patch 9/14.

Regards
Arnaud

> +		err = -EBUSY;
> +		goto out;
> +	}
> +
>  	len = strcspn(buf, "\n");
>  	if (!len) {
>  		dev_err(dev, "can't provide a NULL firmware\n");
>