linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add a test to catch unprobed Devicetree devices

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: <20230810215453.GA1341305-robh@kernel.org>
Date:   Thu, 10 Aug 2023 15:54:53 -0600
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Nícolas F. R. A. Prado 
        <nfraprado@...labora.com>
Cc:     Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, cocci@...ia.fr,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
        kernelci@...ts.linux.dev, Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>, kernel@...labora.com,
        Guenter Roeck <groeck@...omium.org>,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Add a test to catch unprobed Devicetree devices

On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 03:43:09PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 10, 2023 at 04:23:49PM -0400, Nícolas F. R. A. Prado wrote:
> > 
> > Regressions that cause a device to no longer be probed by a driver can
> > have a big impact on the platform's functionality, and despite being
> > relatively common there isn't currently any generic test to detect them.
> > As an example, bootrr [1] does test for device probe, but it requires
> > defining the expected probed devices for each platform.
> > 
> > Given that the Devicetree already provides a static description of
> > devices on the system, it is a good basis for building such a test on
> > top.
> > 
> > This series introduces a test to catch regressions that prevent devices
> > from probing.
> > 
> > Patch 1 introduces a script to parse the kernel source using Coccinelle
> > and extract all compatibles that can be matched by a Devicetree node to
> > a driver. Patch 2 adds a kselftest that walks over the Devicetree nodes
> > on the current platform and compares the compatibles to the ones on the
> > list, and on an ignore list, to point out devices that failed to be
> > probed.
> > 
> > A compatible list is needed because not all compatibles that can show up
> > in a Devicetree node can be used to match to a driver, for example the
> > code for that compatible might use "OF_DECLARE" type macros and avoid
> > the driver framework, or the node might be controlled by a driver that
> > was bound to a different node.
> > 
> > An ignore list is needed for the few cases where it's common for a
> > driver to match a device but not probe, like for the "simple-mfd"
> > compatible, where the driver only probes if that compatible is the
> > node's first compatible.
> > 
> > Even though there's already scripts/dtc/dt-extract-compatibles that does
> > a similar job, it didn't seem to find all compatibles, returning ~3k,
> > while Coccinelle found ~11k. Besides that, Coccinelle actually parses
> > the C files, so it should be a more robust solution than relying on
> > regexes.
> 
> I just sent a patch[1] last week fixing missing a bunch. I only looked 
> at the change in count of undocumented (by schema) though.

With the existing script, I get 11761 compatibles and 12916 with my fix. 
So how are you getting only 3k?

Rob