linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Support 'reg-io-width' property for shared memory

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: <20240903154000.GA2080277@bogus>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2024 16:40:00 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@...adcom.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
	"open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"open list:SYSTEM CONTROL & POWER/MANAGEMENT INTERFACE" <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
	justin.chen@...adcom.com, opendmb@...il.com,
	kapil.hali@...adcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Support 'reg-io-width'
 property for shared memory

On Tue, Aug 27, 2024 at 11:24:50AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> Some shared memory areas might only support a certain access width,
> such as 32-bit, which memcpy_{from,to}_io() does not adhere to at least
> on ARM64 by making both 8-bit and 64-bit accesses to such memory.
>
> Update the shmem layer to support reading from and writing to such
> shared memory area using the specified I/O width in the Device Tree. The
> various transport layers making use of the shmem.c code are updated
> accordingly to pass the I/O accessors that they store.
>

This looks good to me now, much simpler. I will push this to -next soon,
but it won't be for v6.12. I have already sent PR for that. I want this
to be in -next for longer just to see if anyone has any comments and
doesn't break any platform(which it shouldn't anyways).

Just hoping if anyone looks at it and have feedback once it is in -next.
I will apply formally at v6.12-rc1 and report back if no one complains
until then.

--
Regards,
Sudeep