linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clocksource: timer-sp804: Fix read_current_timer() issue when clock source is not registered

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: <21ea3de4-ca42-4576-a4ec-b89b3e2a2ac9@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2025 14:41:29 +0100
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>,
 stephen eta zhou <stephen.eta.zhou@...look.com>
Cc: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clocksource: timer-sp804: Fix read_current_timer() issue
 when clock source is not registered


Hi Krzysztof,

On 07/03/2025 12:17, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 07/03/2025 09:10, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
>>
>> Hi Stephen,
>>
>> thanks for the proposed fix
>>
>> On 21/02/2025 04:46, stephen eta zhou wrote:
>>> Hi daniel
>>>
>>> While debugging on the vexpress-v2p-ca9 platform, I discovered that the read_current_timer API wasn't functioning correctly. The issue was that the SP804 driver lacked ARM32 support and did not register read_current_timer. To add ARM32 compatibility, I’ve submitted this patch. Without it, using SP804 as the timer on ARM32 causes issues with boot_init_stack_canary when inserting the canary value into the interrupt stack, and also affects entropy generation and collection, resulting in incorrect rdseed values.
>>
>> It is better to put that information in the changelog and provide a
>> fixed format of the patch description.
> Daniel,
> 
> In case you actually consider applying this - some of the patches or
> their descriptions were generated by sort of AI tools, thus approach
> with caution.
> 
> It was already pointed out that patches might be a garbage output of AI.
> Also they were not tested, even though what is claimed here "debugging
> on ...".

Oh! Thanks for letting me know that, I appreciate

I'll pay double attention to the patches.

Thanks

   -- Daniel

-- 
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog