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: <20200930205149.GA3052@Asurada-Nvidia>
Date:   Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:51:49 -0700
From:   Nicolin Chen <nicoleotsuka@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     thierry.reding@...il.com, joro@...tes.org, krzk@...nel.org,
        vdumpa@...dia.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, iommu@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] iommu/tegra-smmu: Rework .probe_device and
 .attach_dev

On Wed, Sep 30, 2020 at 06:09:43PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> ...
> >  static int tegra_smmu_attach_dev(struct iommu_domain *domain,
> >  				 struct device *dev)
> >  {
> > +	struct iommu_fwspec *fwspec = dev_iommu_fwspec_get(dev);
> >  	struct tegra_smmu *smmu = dev_iommu_priv_get(dev);
> >  	struct tegra_smmu_as *as = to_smmu_as(domain);
> > -	struct device_node *np = dev->of_node;
> > -	struct of_phandle_args args;
> >  	unsigned int index = 0;
> >  	int err = 0;
> >  
> > -	while (!of_parse_phandle_with_args(np, "iommus", "#iommu-cells", index,
> > -					   &args)) {
> > -		unsigned int swgroup = args.args[0];
> > -
> > -		if (args.np != smmu->dev->of_node) {
> > -			of_node_put(args.np);
> > -			continue;
> > -		}
> > -
> > -		of_node_put(args.np);
> > +	if (!fwspec || fwspec->ops != &tegra_smmu_ops)
> > +		return -ENOENT;
> 
> In previous reply you said that these fwspec checks are borrowed from
> the arm-smmu driver, but I'm now looking at what other drivers do and I
> don't see them having this check.
> 
> Hence I'm objecting the need to have this check here. You either should
> give a rational to having the check or it should be removed.
> 
> Please never blindly copy foreign code, you should always double-check it.

I will give a test and remove it upon positive result.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ