linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] mfd: zl3073x: Add functions to work with register mailboxes

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: <7d96b3a4-9098-4ffa-be51-4ce5dd64a112@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2025 21:58:48 +0200
From: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@...ux.dev>,
 Arkadiusz Kubalewski <arkadiusz.kubalewski@...el.com>,
 Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@...nel.org>, Conor Dooley
 <conor+dt@...nel.org>, Prathosh Satish <Prathosh.Satish@...rochip.com>,
 Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>,
 Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>, Andrew Morton
 <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, Michal Schmidt <mschmidt@...hat.com>,
 devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4 5/8] mfd: zl3073x: Add functions to work with
 register mailboxes



On 24. 04. 25 9:29 odp., Andrew Lunn wrote:
>> Yes, PHC (PTP) sub-driver is using mailboxes as well. Gpio as well for some
>> initial configuration.
> 
> O.K, so the mailbox code needs sharing. The question is, where do you
> put it.

This is crucial question... If I put the MB API into DPLL sub-driver
then PTP sub-driver will depend on it. Potential GPIO sub-driver as
well.

There could be some special library module to provide this for
sub-drivers but is this what we want? And if so where to put it?

>>> The mutex needs to be shared, but that could be in the common data
>>> structure.
>>
>> Do you mean that sub-device would access mutexes placed in zl3073x_dev which
>> is parent (mfd) driver structure?
> 
> Yes.

So, some helper functions for taking and releasing lock... The v4
approach uses (will use) one mutex per mailbox type but one mutex for
MB access is also sufficient.

Ivan