linux-kernel - RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v12 4/5] firmware: imx: add driver for NXP EdgeLock Enclave

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:
 <AM9PR04MB86045B01999B7B2E91434D4E95E12@AM9PR04MB8604.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2025 12:55:24 +0000
From: Pankaj Gupta <pankaj.gupta@....com>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
	Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Sascha
 Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>, Pengutronix Kernel Team
	<kernel@...gutronix.de>, Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>
CC: "linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
	"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [PATCH v12 4/5] firmware: imx: add driver for NXP
 EdgeLock Enclave

> You got comment on this, more than once.

> Rest of the email is poorly formatted, so I am just skimming through it.
> Fix your email program to send readable content if you want some answers for 
> stuff I missed. I expect all my comments fully addressed, not just some of 
> them.

There is a bug in the outlook.
I will remove these lines in my replies.

>>>> + +static int se_if_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) { +
>>>> const struct se_if_node_info_list *info_list; +     const struct
>>>> se_if_node_info *info; +     struct device *dev = &pdev->>dev;
>>>> +     struct se_fw_load_info *load_fw; +     struct se_if_priv
>>>> *priv; +     u32 idx; +     int ret; +q +     idx =
>>>> GET_IDX_FROM_DEV_NODE_NAME(dev->>of_node);
>
>> NAK. Node can be called firmware and your entire driver collapes.
> The macro is updated to verify the correct-ness of node-name.

> NAK, do you understand the term? I provided the reasons for NAK.
Your suggestion is to enable the driver for all allowed node names.
1. firmware
2. secure
3. secure-enclave

Understood, will allow these names for the driver.

>
> +               (!memcmp(dev_of_node->full_name, NODE_NAME,
> strlen(NODE_NAME)) ?\ ((strlen(dev_of_node->full_name) >
> strlen(NODE_NAME)) ?\ GET_ASCII_TO_U8((strlen(dev_of_node-
> >full_name) - strlen(NODE_NAME)),\ dev_of_node-
> >full_name[strlen(NODE_NAME) + 1], \ -
> dev_of_node->full_name[strlen(NODE_NAME) + 2]) : 0)
> +                               dev_of_node-
> >full_name[strlen(NODE_NAME) + 2]) : 0) : -EINVAL)
>
>>>> +     info_list = device_get_match_data(dev); +     if (idx >>=
>>>> info_list->>num_mu) { +             dev_err(dev,
>>>> +                     "Incorrect node name :%s\n",
>>>> +                     dev->>of_node->>full_name);
>>
>>> Nope. "firmware" or "secure" are correct node names.
>> New check is added to validate the correctness of the node name for
>> this driver. Replaced the message of " Incorrect node name..", with
>> the help message.

> You did not resolve the NAK.
> 1. You cannot reject correct names.
Ok, Understood.
>2. You cannot add undocumented ABI. You could try to document it, but it will 
>not solve the first problem.
Ok. Will not add the ABI document.

Best regards,
Krzysztof

Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/pkcs7-signature" (11094 bytes)