linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Make qcom,vmid an array

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 9 Jan 2023 18:14:18 +0100
From:   Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
To:     Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Cc:     Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, andersson@...nel.org,
        agross@...nel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/3] dt-bindings: reserved-memory: rmtfs: Make
 qcom,vmid an array

On 2023-01-09 12:41:00, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> 
> 
> On 9.01.2023 10:51, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> > On 09/01/2023 10:39, Konrad Dybcio wrote:
> >> Some SoCs mandate that the RMTFS is also assigned to the NAV VM, while
> >> others really don't want that. Since it has to be conditional, turn
> >> qcom,vmid into an u32 array so that we can handle the NAV case, as
> >> well as other similar ones if they pop up in the future.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
> >> ---
> >> v2 -> v3:
> >> Rewrite to accomodate for changes, don't pick up tags
> >>
> >>  .../devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml   | 4 ++--
> >>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> >> index 2998f1c8f0db..cfc2fda30eba 100644
> >> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> >> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/reserved-memory/qcom,rmtfs-mem.yaml
> >> @@ -27,9 +27,9 @@ properties:
> >>        identifier of the client to use this region for buffers
> >>  
> >>    qcom,vmid:
> >> -    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32
> >> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32-array
> >>      description: >
> >> -      vmid of the remote processor, to set up memory protection
> >> +      Array of vmids of the remote processors, to set up memory protection
> > 
> > You need now min and maxItems.
> Hm, I tested it with and without:
> 
> minItems: 1
> maxItems: 2
> 
> on DTs with either one or two VMIDs defined and neither complains..

This sounds like a constraint, so it'd only fail on DTs with zero or
more than two VMIDs (when min/maxItems is present, no complaints
otherwise).

- Marijn