linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] tee: Support shm registration without dma-buf backing

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: <20210610073424.GB2753553@jade>
Date:   Thu, 10 Jun 2021 09:34:24 +0200
From:   Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
To:     Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...ux.microsoft.com>
Cc:     Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>, Rijo-john.Thomas@....com,
        Allen Pais <apais@...ux.microsoft.com>,
        Peter Huewe <peterhuewe@....de>,
        Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@...nel.org>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>,
        Vikas Gupta <vikas.gupta@...adcom.com>,
        Thirupathaiah Annapureddy <thiruan@...rosoft.com>,
        Pavel Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
        Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org,
        linux-integrity <linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/7] tee: Support shm registration without dma-buf
 backing

On Wed, Jun 09, 2021 at 08:51:04AM -0500, Tyler Hicks wrote:
[snip]
> > > I've just posted "[PATCH 0/7] tee: shared memory updates",
> > > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210609102324.2222332-1-jens.wiklander@linaro.org/
> > > 
> > > Where tee_shm_alloc() is replaced by among other functions
> > > tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf(). tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf() takes care of the
> > > problem with TEE_SHM_DMA_BUF.
> > 
> > Thanks! At first glance, that series would take care of the last three
> > patches in my kexec/kdump series.
> 
> Correction: Your series would not completely take care of the last three
> patches in my kexec/kdump series because your series doesn't implement
> the .shutdown() hook for tee_bnxt_fw.
> 
> Does it make sense to take my series first and then rebase your series
> on top of it? That would allow my fixes to flow back to stable, then
> your changes would greatly clean up the implementation in future
> releases.

Yes, we could try that. I'd like to see tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf() being
used instead of tee_shm_alloc() in ftpm_tee_probe() and
tee_bnxt_fw_probe(). So it would be great if you could include "tee: add
tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf()" in your patch set.

My patch set would then shrink a bit. By the way, thanks for reviewing
it.

Cheers,
Jens