linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: rpmh: Use __fill_rpmh_msg API during rpmh

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: <159255500790.62212.11790974984337702896@swboyd.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 01:23:27 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
To:     Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>, agross@...nel.org,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dianders@...omium.org, rnayak@...eaurora.org, ilina@...eaurora.org,
        lsrao@...eaurora.org, Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] soc: qcom: rpmh: Use __fill_rpmh_msg API during rpmh_write()

Quoting Maulik Shah (2020-06-18 06:14:11)
> Use __fill_rpmh_msg API during rpmh_write(). This allows to
> remove duplication of code in error checking, copying commands
> and setting message state.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Maulik Shah <mkshah@...eaurora.org>
> ---
>  drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c | 12 +++---------
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
> index f2b5b46c..a0a0b97 100644
> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/rpmh.c
> @@ -181,8 +181,6 @@ static int __rpmh_write(const struct device *dev, enum rpmh_state state,
>         struct cache_req *req;
>         int i;
>  
> -       rpm_msg->msg.state = state;
> -
>         /* Cache the request in our store and link the payload */
>         for (i = 0; i < rpm_msg->msg.num_cmds; i++) {
>                 req = cache_rpm_request(ctrlr, state, &rpm_msg->msg.cmds[i]);
> @@ -190,8 +188,6 @@ static int __rpmh_write(const struct device *dev, enum rpmh_state state,
>                         return PTR_ERR(req);
>         }
>  
> -       rpm_msg->msg.state = state;
> -
>         if (state == RPMH_ACTIVE_ONLY_STATE) {
>                 WARN_ON(irqs_disabled());
>                 ret = rpmh_rsc_send_data(ctrlr_to_drv(ctrlr), &rpm_msg->msg);

Were these two hunks just nonsense assignments to rpm_msg->msg.state?

> @@ -268,11 +264,9 @@ int rpmh_write(const struct device *dev, enum rpmh_state state,
>         DEFINE_RPMH_MSG_ONSTACK(dev, state, &compl, rpm_msg);
>         int ret;
>  
> -       if (!cmd || !n || n > MAX_RPMH_PAYLOAD)
> -               return -EINVAL;
> -
> -       memcpy(rpm_msg.cmd, cmd, n * sizeof(*cmd));
> -       rpm_msg.msg.num_cmds = n;
> +       ret = __fill_rpmh_msg(&rpm_msg, state, cmd, n);
> +       if (ret)
> +               return ret;

This part makes sense and is discussed in the commit text.