linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] firmware: arm_scmi: add SCMIv3.0 Sensors timestamped reads

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]

Date:   Thu, 19 Nov 2020 11:42:16 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        lukasz.luba@....com, Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com,
        egranata@...gle.com, jbhayana@...gle.com,
        peter.hilber@...nsynergy.com, mikhail.golubev@...nsynergy.com,
        Igor.Skalkin@...nsynergy.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] firmware: arm_scmi: add SCMIv3.0 Sensors
 timestamped reads

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 04:29:03PM +0000, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> Add new .reading_get_timestamped() method to sensor_ops to support SCMIv3.0
> timestamped reads.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
> ---
> V2 --> v3
> - setting rx_size to 0 in sensor_reading_get to allow fw to send
>   both v2 and v3 replies...even if sensor_reading_get() only handles
>   v2 spec and returns one single value
> - using get_unaligned_le64 in lieu of le64_to_cpu
> - removed refs to v2.1
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c | 137 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
>  include/linux/scmi_protocol.h       |  22 +++++
>  2 files changed, 152 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c
> index 1c83aaae0012..0adc545116a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/sensors.c
> @@ -156,6 +156,27 @@ struct scmi_msg_sensor_reading_get {
>  #define SENSOR_READ_ASYNC	BIT(0)
>  };
>  
> +struct scmi_resp_sensor_reading_get {
> +	__le64 readings;

Generally I have avoided such single element structures so far. Any
particular reasons for having it ?

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep