linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] tee: optee: Populate child nodes in probe function

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:   Fri, 11 Nov 2022 16:13:36 +0000
From:   Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To:     Ludvig Pärsson <ludvig.parsson@...s.com>
Cc:     Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>, kernel@...s.com,
        Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>,
        Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
        op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tee: optee: Populate child nodes in probe function

On Wed, Nov 09, 2022 at 05:07:08PM +0100, Ludvig Pärsson wrote:
> Currently there is no dependency between the "linaro,scmi-optee" driver
> and the tee_core. If the scmi-optee driver gets probed before the
> tee_bus_type is initialized, then we will get an unwanted error print.
> 
> This patch enables putting scmi-optee nodes as children to the optee
> node in devicetree, which indirectly creates the missing dependency.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ludvig Pärsson <ludvig.parsson@...s.com>
> ---
>  drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c
> index a1c1fa1a9c28..be6f02fd5a7f 100644
> --- a/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c
> +++ b/drivers/tee/optee/smc_abi.c
> @@ -1533,6 +1533,11 @@ static int optee_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (rc)
>  		goto err_disable_shm_cache;
>  
> +	/* Populate any dependent child node (if any) */
> +	rc = devm_of_platform_populate(&pdev->dev);
> +	if (rc)
> +		goto err_disable_shm_cache;
> +

While I agree with idea of populating dependent child nodes from here,
I am not sure if it is OK to give error if that fails or to just continue
as there may be other users(like the user-space) for the OPTEE in general.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep