linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] drivers/cros

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: <CACeCKafGg5=1MQQdCtXDm-3LE2VsixHPsUDngRwQXUvAwQ=u=Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 21 Dec 2022 16:38:28 -0800
From:   Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org>
To:     Rob Barnes <robbarnes@...gle.com>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        chrome-platform@...ts.linux.dev, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        dtor@...omium.org, Benson Leung <bleung@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/cros_ec: Handle CrOS EC panics

On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 3:55 PM Rob Barnes <robbarnes@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 21, 2022 at 12:23 PM Prashant Malani <pmalani@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Can you provide a link (either in the commit, or here in the comment)
> > to the coreboot/BIOS code which uses this value? I feel this should
> > be documented in some form that correlates the caller and the callee.
>
> Link: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/chromiumos/third_party/coreboot/+/4023535

Thanks. Please add a code link (for example, I could find [2], but you
could use another code mirror
if there is a canonical one for coreboot) to the commit description,
or in the comment when you send
out v2.

> > Any reason we cannot use the existing event_notifier (with value argument)?
> > It's a system panic, so I doubt that computational overhead for other
> > notifier block
> > listeners is a concern.
>
> The value field is already being used for "queued_during_suspend" in
> event_notifier.

OK, I suppose you could use the data pointer...

It's just I find having a notifier for a single use case overkill(even
2 would be fine); one could get away with exposing a method
in cros_typec_debugfs via a local .h file (it can compile to a stub if
cros_typec_debugfs is not compiled to the kernel);
the LPC code can then just call that method instead of invoking a notifier.

Best regards,

-Prashant

> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bdc48fa11e46f867ea4d75fa59ee87a7f48be144
[2] https://github.com/coreboot/coreboot/blob/ff6b3af113f84a1957dcdf8a8179a751ce08becf/src/ec/google/chromeec/acpi/ec.asl#L15