linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: meson: Constify some structure

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: <c8eca123-8ca8-4dfc-acc6-3e196ff0c844@wanadoo.fr>
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2024 17:08:27 +0200
From: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
To: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
Cc: linus.walleij@...aro.org, neil.armstrong@...aro.org,
 khilman@...libre.com, martin.blumenstingl@...glemail.com,
 linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
 linux-amlogic@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] pinctrl: meson: Constify some structure

Le 07/08/2024 à 16:14, Jerome Brunet a écrit :
> On Wed 07 Aug 2024 at 11:30, Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr> wrote:
> 
>> These 3 patches constify some structures in order to move some data to a
>> read-only section, so increase overall security.
>>
>> It is splitted in 3 to ease review.
> 
> I'm not entirely sure it eases review in this case.
> If a v2 is necessary, I think a single patch would be better.
> 
>> Patch 1: struct meson_pmx_group and meson_pmx_func
>> patch 2: struct meson_bank
>> patch 3: struct meson_pmx_bank
> 
> Is there any reason for leaving out 'struct meson_pinctrl_data' and
> 'struct meson_axg_pmx_data' ? I don't think they get modified but maybe
> I missed it.

No good reasons.

I'll send a v2 with everything constified all at once.

Should I take the R-b and T-b below, for the v2?


Thanks for the review and comment.

CJ

> 
>>
>> All patches are only compile tested.
> 
> Looks good anyway
> Reviewed-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
> 
> On the vim3l:
> Tested-by: Jerome Brunet <jbrunet@...libre.com>
> 
>