linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/4] nvmem: core: allow nvmem_cell_post_process

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: <20230309122324.4b012a58@xps-13>
Date:   Thu, 9 Mar 2023 12:23:24 +0100
From:   Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
To:     Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>
Cc:     Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
        Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
        Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
        Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
        NXP Linux Team <linux-imx@....com>,
        Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, u-boot@...ts.denx.de,
        Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] nvmem: core: allow nvmem_cell_post_process_t
 callbacks to adjust buffer

Hi Srinivas,

srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org wrote on Thu, 9 Mar 2023 10:53:07 +0000:

> On 09/03/2023 10:32, Miquel Raynal wrote:
> > Hi Srinivas,
> > 
> > srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org wrote on Thu, 9 Mar 2023 10:12:24 +0000:
> >   
> >> On 22/02/2023 17:22, Rafał Miłecki wrote:  
> >>> @@ -1791,11 +1792,15 @@ ssize_t nvmem_device_cell_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem,
> >>>    	if (!nvmem)
> >>>    		return -EINVAL;  
> >>>    > +	/* Cells with read_post_process hook may realloc buffer we can't allow here */  
> >>> +	if (info->read_post_process)
> >>> +		return -EINVAL;  
> >> This should probably go in 1/4 patch. Other than that series looks good to me.  
> > 
> > FYI patch 1/4 is also carried by the nvmem-layouts series, so it's
> > probably best to keep these 2 patches separated to simplify the merging.  
> that is intermediate thing, but Ideally this change belongs to 1/4 patch, so once I apply these patches then we can always rebase layout series on top of nvmem-next

Well, I still don't see the need for this patch because we have no use
for it *after* the introduction of layouts. Yes in some cases changing
the size of a cell might maybe be needed, but right now the use case is
to provide a MAC address, we know beforehand the size of the cell, so
there is no need, currently, for this hack.

Whatever. If you want it, just merge it. But *please*, I would like
to see these layouts in, so what's the plan?

Thanks,
Miquèl