linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/3] firmware/arm_ffa: remove __le64_to

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z072Mm61eE_Twx1B@bogus>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2024 12:14:42 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] firmware/arm_ffa: remove __le64_to_cpu() when set
 uuid for direct msg v2

On Mon, Nov 25, 2024 at 09:52:51AM +0000, Yeoreum Yun wrote:
> From: Levi Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>
> 
> UUID is saved in big endian format.
> i.e) For uuid "378daedc-f06b-4446-8314-40ab933c87a3",
> 
> It should be saved in memory like:
>     37 8d ae dc
>     f0 6b 44 46
>     83 14 40 ab
>     93 3c 87 a3
> 
> Accoding to FF-A specification[0] 15.4 FFA_MSG_SEND_DRIECT_REQ2,
> then UUID is saved in register:
>     UUID Lo  x2  Bytes[0...7] of UUID with byte 0 in the low-order bits.
>     UUID Hi  x3  Bytes[8...15] of UUID with byte 8 in the low-order bits.
> 
> That means, we don't need to swap the uuid when it send via direct
> message request version 2, just send it as saved in memory.
> 
> Remove le64_to_cpu() for uuid in direct message request version 2,
> and change uuid_regs' type to __be64 because UUID is saved in network
> byte order.
>

  |   warning: incorrect type in initializer (different base types)
  |      expected unsigned long a2
  |      got restricted __be64
  |   warning: incorrect type in initializer (different base types)
  |      expected unsigned long a3
  |      got restricted __be64

We will get this warning back with this change, wondering if we can take
up BE support separately.

--
Regards,
Sudeep