linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] rust: add basic ELF sections parser

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: <2025053058-siding-emperor-d8fd@gregkh>
Date: Fri, 30 May 2025 08:21:39 +0200
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To: Alexandre Courbot <acourbot@...dia.com>
Cc: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>, Timur Tabi <timur@...nel.org>,
	John Hubbard <jhubbard@...dia.com>, Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>,
	Alex Gaynor <alex.gaynor@...il.com>,
	Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>, Gary Guo <gary@...yguo.net>,
	Björn Roy Baron <bjorn3_gh@...tonmail.com>,
	Benno Lossin <benno.lossin@...ton.me>,
	Andreas Hindborg <a.hindborg@...nel.org>,
	Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@...gle.com>, Trevor Gross <tmgross@...ch.edu>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, rust-for-linux@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rust: add basic ELF sections parser

On Fri, May 30, 2025 at 09:58:02AM +0900, Alexandre Courbot wrote:
> > But for now, doing it in generic code, that all systems end up loading,
> > yet very very very few would ever actually use makes no sense.  And
> > adding it to a driver also doesn't make sense as you can define your
> > user/kernel api now, it's not set in stone at all given that there is no
> > existing code merged.
> 
> Eschewing this from the driver would require duplicating the GSP
> firmware (a healthy 26MB compressed binary) in linux-firmware to provide
> both ELF and non-ELF versions of the same code, and also store the other
> ELF sections as their own files. I expect this to be a hard sell for
> linux-firmware.

Why would the linux-firmware people care about the size of firmware
blobs being given to them?  That's the whole reason for their existance,
to put them in one place instead of having to download them from random
locations on the internet, or to have them in the kernel tree itself.

It's already 300MB or so for the whole project, what's 26MB more?  It's
not like the collection is ever going to get smaller :)

thanks,

greg k-h