linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tee: optee: Move pool

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: <CAFA6WYOWQZqtAcdCKcBa7qnCY1ueBzU1_1HSbfHPaLeyPdtxbw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:50:02 +0530
From: Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org>
To: Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org>
Cc: Balint Dobszay <balint.dobszay@....com>, op-tee@...ts.trustedfirmware.org, 
	linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, corbet@....net, sudeep.holla@....com, 
	rdunlap@...radead.org, krzk@...nel.org, gyorgy.szing@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] tee: optee: Move pool_op helper functions

On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 at 14:11, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 6:58 AM Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 at 21:20, Jens Wiklander <jens.wiklander@...aro.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 7:06 AM Sumit Garg <sumit.garg@...aroorg> wrote:
> [snip]
> > > > > --- a/include/linux/tee_drv.h
> > > > > +++ b/include/linux/tee_drv.h
> > > > > @@ -275,6 +275,17 @@ void *tee_get_drvdata(struct tee_device *teedev);
> > > > >  struct tee_shm *tee_shm_alloc_priv_buf(struct tee_context *ctx, size_t size);
> > > > >  struct tee_shm *tee_shm_alloc_kernel_buf(struct tee_context *ctx, size_t size);
> > > > >
> > > > > +int tee_shm_pool_op_alloc_helper(struct tee_shm_pool *pool, struct tee_shm *shm,
> > > > > +                                size_t size, size_t align,
> > > > > +                                int (*shm_register)(struct tee_context *ctx,
> > > > > +                                                    struct tee_shm *shm,
> > > > > +                                                    struct page **pages,
> > > > > +                                                    size_t num_pages,
> > > > > +                                                    unsigned long start));
> > > > > +void tee_shm_pool_op_free_helper(struct tee_shm_pool *pool, struct tee_shm *shm,
> > > > > +                                int (*shm_unregister)(struct tee_context *ctx,
> > > > > +                                                      struct tee_shm *shm));
> > > > > +
> > > >
> > > > These rather belong to drivers/tee/tee_private.h as we shouldn't
> > > > expose them to other kernel client drivers.
> > >
> > > This is the right place, this .h file is for TEE drivers too.
> > >
> >
> > But this is shared with other kernel TEE client drivers and we
> > shouldn't expose internal APIs which aren't meant for them with a side
> > effect of API abuse too. Any particular reason to not use
> > drivers/tee/tee_private.h?
>
> drivers/tee/tee_private.h is supposed to be used internally by only
> the files in drivers/tee.

How about "struct tee_device" being in drivers/tee/tee_private.h?

> If you look in include/linux/tee_drv.h
> you'll find a few functions and other definitions that a kernel TEE
> client driver should not use, for instance, tee_device_register() and
> tee_device_unregister(). This kernel TEE client interface was
> introduced with commit 25559c22cef8 ("tee: add kernel internal client
> interface"). include/linux/tee_drv.h existed before we even had any
> kernel TEE client interface.

Anyhow, it looks like there is a chance for refactoring here. How
about splitting this header further in something like
include/linux/tee_core.h which will contain all the pieces relevant to
TEE drivers?

BTW, this patch series can keep using include/linux/tee_drv.h for the
time being.

-Sumit

>
> Cheers,
> Jens