linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] firmware: arm

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: <ZxueBWB9nJ9Mt7bW@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 15:32:53 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc: Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
	Sibi Sankar <quic_sibis@...cinc.com>, sudeep.holla@....com,
	ulf.hansson@...aro.org, jassisinghbrar@...il.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	konradybcio@...nel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	tstrudel@...gle.com, rafael@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] firmware: arm_scmi: Misc Fixes

On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 11:29:05AM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:

> > > >>> [    8.098452] arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to add opps_by_lvl at 3417600 for NCC - ret:-16
> > > >>> [    8.109647] arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to add opps_by_lvl at 3417600 for NCC - ret:-16
> > > >>> [    8.128970] arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to add opps_by_lvl at 3417600 for NCC - ret:-16
> > > >>> [    8.142455] arm-scmi arm-scmi.0.auto: Failed to add opps_by_lvl at 3417600 for NCC - ret:-16

> I think dev_info could be an option from the SCMI perspective (as per my
> other mail), the important thing in these regards is to NOT go
> completely silent against fw anomalies...to avoid the the risk of being
> silently ignored .... I'll see what Sudeep thinks about...

I agree.

But could the error handling be improved to look less scary for an end
user by saying something about duplicate entries being ignored instead
perhaps?

Printing something at info level and with a FW_BUG ("[Firmware Bug]: ")
prefix as was done here:

	https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230414084619.31524-1-johan+linaro@kernel.org/

should make it clear that this is not something for end users to worry
(too much) about.

Johan