linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] remoteproc: qcom: Update rproc parse firmware callback

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: <85ee0b41-dfd0-8fc3-6d16-3d055ad18792@quicinc.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 19:27:52 +0530
From:   Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu <quic_srivasam@...cinc.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>, <agross@...nel.org>,
        <bgoswami@...cinc.com>, <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        <broonie@...nel.org>, <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        <judyhsiao@...omium.org>, <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org>, <perex@...ex.cz>,
        <quic_plai@...cinc.com>, <quic_rohkumar@...cinc.com>,
        <robh+dt@...nel.org>, <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        <tiwai@...e.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 4/8] remoteproc: qcom: Update rproc parse firmware
 callback


On 9/12/2022 4:25 AM, Stephen Boyd wrote:
Thanks for your time Stephen!!!
> Quoting Srinivasa Rao Mandadapu (2022-09-08 06:23:38)
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
>> index 02d17b4..207270d4 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/qcom_q6v5_adsp.c
>> @@ -447,7 +447,7 @@ static unsigned long adsp_panic(struct rproc *rproc)
>>          return qcom_q6v5_panic(&adsp->q6v5);
>>   }
>>
>> -static const struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = {
>> +static struct rproc_ops adsp_ops = {
> This is sad.
>
>>          .start = adsp_start,
>>          .stop = adsp_stop,
>>          .da_to_va = adsp_da_to_va,
>> @@ -590,6 +590,9 @@ static int adsp_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>                  return ret;
>>          }
>>
>> +       if (desc->has_iommu)
>> +               adsp_ops.parse_fw = rproc_elf_load_rsc_table;
>> +
> Why not have two different set of ops so that the function pointer table
> can't be hijacked? One for the parse_fw callback? Or simply return from
> rproc_elf_load_rsc_table() when has_iommu is false?
Okay. Will change accordingly.
>
>>          rproc = rproc_alloc(&pdev->dev, pdev->name, &adsp_ops,