linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the powerpc tree

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210219073147.478c3dda@canb.auug.org.au>
Date:   Fri, 19 Feb 2021 07:31:47 +1100
From:   Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
To:     Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>
Cc:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
        PowerPC <linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org>,
        Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Lakshmi Ramasubramanian <nramas@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the devicetree tree with the
 powerpc tree

Hi all,

On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 07:52:52 -0600 Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2021 at 5:34 AM Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, 18 Feb 2021 21:44:37 +1100 Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au> wrote:  
> > >
> > > I think it just needs this?
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/elf_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/elf_64.c
> > > index 87e34611f93d..0492ca6003f3 100644
> > > --- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/elf_64.c
> > > +++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/elf_64.c
> > > @@ -104,7 +104,7 @@ static void *elf64_load(struct kimage *image, char *kernel_buf,
> > >
> > >       fdt = of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt(image, initrd_load_addr,
> > >                                          initrd_len, cmdline,
> > > -                                        fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params));
> > > +                                        kexec_fdt_totalsize_ppc64(image));
> > >       if (!fdt) {
> > >               pr_err("Error setting up the new device tree.\n");
> > >               ret = -EINVAL;
> > >  
> >
> > I thought about that, but the last argument to
> > of_kexec_alloc_and_setup_fdt() is extra_fdt_size and the allocation
> > done is for this:
> >
> > fdt_size = fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params) +
> >                    (cmdline ? strlen(cmdline) : 0) +
> >                    FDT_EXTRA_SPACE +
> >                    extra_fdt_size;
> >
> > and kexec_fdt_totalsize_ppc64() also includes
> > fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params) so I was not sure.  Maybe
> > kexec_fdt_totalsize_ppc64() needs modification as well?  
> 
> You're both right. Michael's fix is sufficient for the merge. The only
> risk with a larger size is failing to allocate it, but we're talking
> only 10s of KB. Historically until the commit causing the conflict,
> PPC was just used 2x fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params). You could
> drop 'fdt_size = fdt_totalsize(initial_boot_params) + (2 *
> COMMAND_LINE_SIZE);' from kexec_fdt_totalsize_ppc64() as well, but
> then the function name is misleading.
> 
> Lakshmi can send a follow-up patch to fine tune the size and rename
> kexec_fdt_totalsize_ppc64.

OK, I have mode Michael's suggested change to my resolution from today.

-- 
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell

Content of type "application/pgp-signature" skipped