linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: Map the hypervisor FF-A buffers on ffa init

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Z8CnvkUwGKxcz2hj@google.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 17:58:22 +0000
From: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@...gle.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, joey.gouly@....com, maz@...nel.org,
	oliver.upton@...ux.dev, snehalreddy@...gle.com,
	suzuki.poulose@....com, vdonnefort@...gle.com, will@...nel.org,
	yuzenghui@...wei.com, kvmarm@...ts.linux.dev,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] KVM: arm64: Map the hypervisor FF-A buffers on ffa
 init

On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 09:58:28AM +0000, Sudeep Holla wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 26, 2025 at 09:48:52PM +0000, Sebastian Ene wrote:
> > Map the hypervisor's buffers irrespective to the host and return
> > a linux error code from the FF-A error code on failure. Remove
> > the unmap ff-a buffers calls from the hypervisor as it will
> > never be called and move the definition of the
> > ffa_to_linux_error map in the header where it should belong to.
> > Prevent the host from using FF-A if the hypervisor could not
> > map its own buffers with Trustzone.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@...gle.com>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/kvm/hyp/nvhe/ffa.c     | 46 ++++++++++++-------------------
> >  drivers/firmware/arm_ffa/driver.c | 24 ----------------
> >  include/linux/arm_ffa.h           | 24 ++++++++++++++++

Hi Sudeep,

> 
> Can you post the code movement from driver to the header as separate patch
> so that I can take it separately to avoid conflicts with the other changes
> I have. It could be just fine but I see no reason as why it can't be a
> separate change or why it needs to be bundled here.

Yes, let me do that and I will spin up a v2.

Thanks,
Sebastian

> 
> -- 
> Regards,
> Sudeep