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  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]
Date:   Mon, 3 Aug 2020 12:01:35 +0800
From:   Neal Liu <neal.liu@...iatek.com>
To:     Chun-Kuang Hu <chunkuang.hu@...nel.org>
CC:     Neal Liu <neal.liu@...iatek.com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        wsd_upstream <wsd_upstream@...iatek.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "moderated list:ARM/Mediatek SoC support" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] soc: mediatek: add mtk-devapc driver

Hi Chun-Kuang,

On Sat, 2020-08-01 at 08:12 +0800, Chun-Kuang Hu wrote:
> Hi, Neal:
> 
> This patch is for "mediatek,mt6779-devapc", so I think commit title
> should show the SoC ID.

Okay, I'll change title to 'soc:mediatek: add mt6779 devapc driver'.

> 
> Neal Liu <neal.liu@...iatek.com> 於 2020年7月29日 週三 下午4:29寫道:
> >
> > MediaTek bus fabric provides TrustZone security support and data
> > protection to prevent slaves from being accessed by unexpected
> > masters.
> > The security violation is logged and sent to the processor for
> > further analysis or countermeasures.
> >
> > Any occurrence of security violation would raise an interrupt, and
> > it will be handled by mtk-devapc driver. The violation
> > information is printed in order to find the murderer.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Neal Liu <neal.liu@...iatek.com>
> > ---
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > +
> > +struct mtk_devapc_context {
> > +       struct device *dev;
> > +       u32 vio_idx_num;
> > +       void __iomem *devapc_pd_base;
> > +       struct mtk_devapc_vio_info *vio_info;
> > +       const struct mtk_devapc_pd_offset *offset;
> > +       const struct mtk_devapc_vio_dbgs *vio_dbgs;
> > +};
> 
> I think this structure should separate the constant part. The constant part is:
> 
> struct mtk_devapc_data {
>     const u32 vio_idx_num;
>     const struct mtk_devapc_pd_offset *offset; /* I would like to
> remove struct mtk_devapc_pd_offset and directly put its member into
> this structure */
>     const struct mtk_devapc_vio_dbgs *vio_dbgs; /* This may disappear */
> };
> 
> And the context is:
> 
> struct mtk_devapc_context {
>     struct device *dev;
>     void __iomem *devapc_pd_base;
>     const struct mtk_devapc_data *data;
> };
> 
> So when you define this, you would not waste memory to store non-constant data.
> 
> static const struct mtk_devapc_data devapc_mt6779 = {
>  .vio_idx_num = 510,
>  .offset = &mt6779_pd_offset,
>  .vio_dbgs = &mt6779_vio_dbgs,
> };
> 

Sorry, I still don't understand why this refactoring will not waste
memory to store non-constant data. Could you explain more details?
To my understanding, we still also have to allocate memory to store dev
& devapc_pd_base.

> Regards,
> Chun-Kuang.
> 
> > +
> > +#endif /* __MTK_DEVAPC_H__ */
> > --
> > 1.7.9.5
> > _______________________________________________
> > Linux-mediatek mailing list
> > Linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
> > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-mediatek

Powered by blists - more mailing lists