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

Message-ID: <Z8A3RLoZxVxcz3wj@bogus>
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 09:58:28 +0000
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Sebastian Ene <sebastianene@...gle.com>
Cc: catalin.marinas@....com, joey.gouly@....com, maz@...nel.org,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, 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 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 ++++++++++++++++

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.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep