linux-kernel - [PATCH 0/2] mpfs: fix handling failed service requests

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20221118220758.1101409-1-conor@kernel.org>
Date:   Fri, 18 Nov 2022 22:07:57 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
        Jassi Brar <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>
Cc:     Daire McNamara <daire.mcnamara@...rochip.com>,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 0/2] mpfs: fix handling failed service requests

From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>

As things stand, if a service request fails, we never know about it as
the status register is not read. This is quite obviously far from ideal,
as we would be reading garbage from the mailbox if a service was to
fail.

This pair of patches adds handling of the service status to both sides
of the mailbox implementation.

@Jassi, there should be no build, or really functional, dependency here
between patches. In the failing case, the buffer is allocated by the
service driver, so things will "work" just as badly as they did before
if only one of the patches is present. As a result, should be safe to do
the mailbox patch via your tree & the client via the soc tree.

Thanks,
Conor.

Conor Dooley (2):
  soc: microchip: mpfs: handle failed system service requests
  mailbox: mpfs: read the system controller's status

 drivers/mailbox/mailbox-mpfs.c              | 31 +++++++++++++++++++--
 drivers/soc/microchip/mpfs-sys-controller.c |  6 ++++
 2 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

-- 
2.37.2