linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support discovering buildinfo of MISC protocol

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: <20250829-satisfied-carp-from-camelot-bddbfa@sudeepholla>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2025 11:48:56 +0100
From: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
To: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Cc: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>,
	Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
	Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Pengutronix Kernel Team <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
	Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, <arm-scmi@...r.kernel.org>,
	<imx@...ts.linux.dev>, <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/6] firmware: arm_scmi: imx: Support discovering
 buildinfo of MISC protocol

On Wed, Aug 27, 2025 at 12:59:14PM +0800, Peng Fan wrote:
> MISC protocol supports discovering the System Manager(SM) build
> information including build commit, build time and etc. Retrieve the
> information from SM.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
>  .../firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c    | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 41 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> index a8915d3b4df518719d56bfff38922625ad9b70f6..464afeae8267d8c1eca4c4d5e008eca6d741c6ff 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/vendors/imx/imx-sm-misc.c
> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
>  enum scmi_imx_misc_protocol_cmd {
>  	SCMI_IMX_MISC_CTRL_SET	= 0x3,
>  	SCMI_IMX_MISC_CTRL_GET	= 0x4,
> +	SCMI_IMX_MISC_DISCOVER_BUILDINFO = 0x6,
>  	SCMI_IMX_MISC_CTRL_NOTIFY = 0x8,
>  };
>  
> @@ -65,6 +66,15 @@ struct scmi_imx_misc_ctrl_get_out {
>  	__le32 val[];
>  };
>  
> +struct scmi_imx_misc_buildinfo_out {
> +	__le32 buildnum;
> +	__le32 buildcommit;
> +#define MISC_MAX_BUILDDATE	16
> +	u8 builddate[MISC_MAX_BUILDDATE];
> +#define MISC_MAX_BUILDTIME	16
> +	u8 buildtime[MISC_MAX_BUILDTIME];
> +};
> +
>  static int scmi_imx_misc_attributes_get(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
>  					struct scmi_imx_misc_info *mi)
>  {
> @@ -272,6 +282,33 @@ static int scmi_imx_misc_ctrl_set(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph,
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +static int scmi_imx_misc_discover_build_info(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph)
> +{
> +	char date[MISC_MAX_BUILDDATE], time[MISC_MAX_BUILDTIME];
> +	struct scmi_imx_misc_buildinfo_out *out;
> +	struct scmi_xfer *t;
> +	int ret;
> +
> +	ret = ph->xops->xfer_get_init(ph, SCMI_IMX_MISC_DISCOVER_BUILDINFO, 0,
> +				      sizeof(*out), &t);
> +	if (ret)
> +		return ret;
> +
> +	ret = ph->xops->do_xfer(ph, t);
> +	if (!ret) {
> +		out = t->rx.buf;
> +		strscpy(date, out->builddate, MISC_MAX_BUILDDATE);
> +		strscpy(time, out->buildtime, MISC_MAX_BUILDTIME);
> +		dev_info(ph->dev, "SM Version\t= Build %u, Commit %08x %s %s\n",
> +			le32_to_cpu(out->buildnum), le32_to_cpu(out->buildcommit),
> +			date, time);
> +	}
> +
> +	ph->xops->xfer_put(ph, t);
> +
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  static const struct scmi_imx_misc_proto_ops scmi_imx_misc_proto_ops = {
>  	.misc_ctrl_set = scmi_imx_misc_ctrl_set,
>  	.misc_ctrl_get = scmi_imx_misc_ctrl_get,
> @@ -299,6 +336,10 @@ static int scmi_imx_misc_protocol_init(const struct scmi_protocol_handle *ph)
>  	if (ret)
>  		return ret;
>  
> +	ret = scmi_imx_misc_discover_build_info(ph);

To align with other naming,

s/scmi_imx_misc_discover_build_info/scmi_imx_misc_build_info_discover/

> +		return ret;

The document in 1/6 didn't state this as mandatory. IMO, it is not
fair to return error if the return is NOT_SUPPORTED.

-- 
Regards,
Sudeep