linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] soc: qcom: socinfo: Add support for new fields in revision 21

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: <03409f08-9612-40be-b8b2-6cebd5acd0a4@oss.qualcomm.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2025 20:01:44 +0200
From: Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@....qualcomm.com>
To: Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@....qualcomm.com>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konradybcio@...nel.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] soc: qcom: socinfo: Add support for new fields in
 revision 21

On 5/8/25 6:48 PM, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 06:56:47PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>> On Thu, May 08, 2025 at 09:07:03PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 08:28:51PM +0300, Dmitry Baryshkov wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 07:29:45PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
>>>>> Add the subpartfeature offset field to the socinfo structure
>>>>> which came for version 21 of socinfo structure.
>>>>>
>>>>> Subpart_feat_offset is subpart like camera, display, etc.,
>>>>> and its internal feature available on a bin.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <mukesh.ojha@....qualcomm.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> Changes in v2:
>>>>>  - Added debugfs entry and described more about the field in commit.
>>>>>
>>>>>  drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c       | 6 ++++++
>>>>>  include/linux/soc/qcom/socinfo.h | 2 ++
>>>>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
>>>>> index 5800ebf9ceea..bac1485f1b27 100644
>>>>> --- a/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
>>>>> +++ b/drivers/soc/qcom/socinfo.c
>>>>> @@ -154,6 +154,7 @@ struct socinfo_params {
>>>>>  	u32 boot_cluster;
>>>>>  	u32 boot_core;
>>>>>  	u32 raw_package_type;
>>>>> +	u32 nsubpart_feat_array_offset;
>>>>>  };
>>>>>  
>>>>>  struct smem_image_version {
>>>>> @@ -608,6 +609,11 @@ static void socinfo_debugfs_init(struct qcom_socinfo *qcom_socinfo,
>>>>>  			   &qcom_socinfo->info.fmt);
>>>>>  
>>>>>  	switch (qcom_socinfo->info.fmt) {
>>>>> +	case SOCINFO_VERSION(0, 21):
>>>>> +		qcom_socinfo->info.nsubpart_feat_array_offset =
>>>>> +				   __le32_to_cpu(info->nsubpart_feat_array_offset);
>>>>> +		debugfs_create_u32("nsubpart_feat_array_offset", 0444, qcom_socinfo->dbg_root,
>>>>> +				   &qcom_socinfo->info.nsubpart_feat_array_offset);
>>>>
>>>> An offset into what? If this provides additional data, then the data
>>>> should be visible in the debugfs. Not sure, what's the point in dumping
>>>> the offset here.
>>>
>>> offset into info(struct socinfo) object.
>>>
>>> I agree to you and I said the same in first version this is just offset
>>> and does not provide any debug info we would look from userspace.  For
>>> parity with other fields I did it for all newly added fields.
>>> I have dropped it in latest patch.
>>
>> I'd rather see the decoded structure that is being pointed by this
>> offset.
> 
> You mean info + info->nsubpart_feat_array_offset ? 
> 
> There is more to it which I don't want to mention as they are not
> upstreamed yet and unrelated to this change.
> 
> data = info + (offset + (part * sizeof(u32)));
> 
> e.g., Here, part is a enum represents camera, display etc., and data
> represents their feature presents. Since, part is not upstream yet I
> don't feel we should expose this information to debugfs. We could always
> add them in debugfs when such things are standardized and upstreamed.

That's what Dmitry's saying - just add support for them

Konrad