linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Skip adding bad duplicates

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: <ZtiI0u0nAUbWEAAR@pluto>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2024 17:20:34 +0100
From: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>, cristian.marussi@....com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	johan@...nel.org, konradybcio@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/2] firmware: arm_scmi: Skip adding bad duplicates

On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 05:12:29PM +0100, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 04, 2024 at 08:43:24AM +0530, Sibi Sankar wrote:
> > Ensure that the bad duplicates reported by the platform firmware doesn't
> > get added to the opp-tables.
> >
> 
> I am really interested to know if the platform firmware is presenting
> duplicates intentionally for some unknown reasons and we are just speculating
> it to be broken firmware or is it really broken firmware.
> 
> For me, it is very hard to digest something like OPP tables which is there
> for a very long time now is not very well understood by firmware authors.
> How many duplicates are we seeing on this platform really ? If it is
> just one I can understand. More than one is hard to miss from the OPP
> tables in the firmware.
> 
> While I am not opposing to make the driver handle these duplicates,
> I am just worried if they are put there intentionally for reasons we
> don't understand yet or not published.
> 

The number of duplicates reported in logs makes me suspect the same...seems
like intentional/by_design .... but at first I stick to the general issue
of handling bad fw replies and how to survive kernel side at first...but I
indeed share your same concerns...

Thanks,
Cristian