linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v10 3/4] mtd: rawnand: Add support for secure regions in NAND memory

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20210402142730.GA10498@work>
Date:   Fri, 2 Apr 2021 19:57:30 +0530
From:   Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org>
To:     Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...labora.com>
Cc:     miquel.raynal@...tlin.com, richard@....at, vigneshr@...com,
        robh+dt@...nel.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Daniele.Palmas@...it.com,
        bjorn.andersson@...aro.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 3/4] mtd: rawnand: Add support for secure regions in
 NAND memory

On Fri, Apr 02, 2021 at 10:51:54AM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 21:46:22 +0530
> Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, Apr 01, 2021 at 05:54:21PM +0200, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> > > On Thu,  1 Apr 2021 20:49:54 +0530
> > > Manivannan Sadhasivam <manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >   
> > > > @@ -565,6 +608,11 @@ static int nand_block_isreserved(struct mtd_info *mtd, loff_t ofs)
> > > >  
> > > >  	if (!chip->bbt)
> > > >  		return 0;
> > > > +
> > > > +	/* Check if the region is secured */
> > > > +	if (nand_region_is_secured(chip, ofs, 0))
> > > > +		return -EIO;  
> > > 
> > > That would is still wrong, you should never pass a 0 size to
> > > nand_region_is_secured().
> > >   
> > 
> > Size doesn't matter here, that's why I passed 0. Maybe 1 would be
> > appropriate?
> 
> You're checking if a block is reserved, so I think passing the
> eraseblock size would make more sense, but I actually don't understand
> why you need to check if the region is secure here (looks like
> nand_block_isreserved() does not access the flash).
> 

Ah yes indeed, brain fade...

Thanks,
Mani