linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] nvmem: qfprom: Add support for secure reading on QDU1000/QRU1000

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: <68f9bee2-5a5b-2962-6c3d-e73ade371545@linaro.org>
Date:   Fri, 12 May 2023 19:01:24 +0200
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Komal Bajaj <quic_kbajaj@...cinc.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/10] nvmem: qfprom: Add support for secure reading on
 QDU1000/QRU1000

On 12/05/2023 14:21, Komal Bajaj wrote:
> Add qfprom driver support for QDU1000/QRU1000 SOCs.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Komal Bajaj <quic_kbajaj@...cinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c b/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c
> index 20662e2d3732..12a7981a8a71 100644
> --- a/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c
> +++ b/drivers/nvmem/qfprom.c
> @@ -109,6 +109,10 @@ struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data {
>  	bool secure;
>  };
> 
> +static const struct qfprom_soc_compatible_data qdu1000_qfprom = {
> +	.secure = true
> +};
> +
>  static const struct nvmem_keepout sc7180_qfprom_keepout[] = {
>  	{.start = 0x128, .end = 0x148},
>  	{.start = 0x220, .end = 0x228}
> @@ -490,6 +494,7 @@ static int qfprom_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> 
>  static const struct of_device_id qfprom_of_match[] = {
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,qfprom",},
> +	{ .compatible = "qcom,qdu1000-qfprom", .data = &qdu1000_qfprom},
>  	{ .compatible = "qcom,sc7180-qfprom", .data = &sc7180_qfprom},

I have doubts that this is still compatible with qcom,qfprom. It uses
entirely different read method. That's why generic fallbacks are bad,
one more case to my growing list of awesome examples. :)

Best regards,
Krzysztof