linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] drm/xe/xe_late_bind

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: <e6da8bc1-12d2-433e-ad20-095c291e03d4@ijzerbout.nl>
Date: Wed, 24 Sep 2025 22:44:58 +0200
From: Kees Bakker <kees@...erbout.nl>
To: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@...el.com>, intel-xe@...ts.freedesktop.org,
 dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: anshuman.gupta@...el.com, rodrigo.vivi@...el.com,
 alexander.usyskin@...el.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
 daniele.ceraolospurio@...el.com, mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com,
 lucas.demarchi@...el.com, karthik.poosa@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 9/9] drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw: Extract and print version
 info

Op 05-09-2025 om 17:49 schreef Badal Nilawar:
> Extract and print version info of the late binding binary.
>
> v2: Some refinements (Daniele)
>
> Signed-off-by: Badal Nilawar <badal.nilawar@...el.com>
> Reviewed-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi@...el.com>
> ---
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw.c       | 124 +++++++++++++++++++++
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw_types.h |   3 +
>   drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_uc_fw_abi.h          |  66 +++++++++++
>   3 files changed, 193 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw.c
> index 0f062008ca83..38f3feb2aecd 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_late_bind_fw.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,121 @@ late_bind_to_xe(struct xe_late_bind *late_bind)
>   	return container_of(late_bind, struct xe_device, late_bind);
>   }
>   
> +static struct xe_device *
> +late_bind_fw_to_xe(struct xe_late_bind_fw *lb_fw)
> +{
> +	return container_of(lb_fw, struct xe_device, late_bind.late_bind_fw[lb_fw->id]);
> +}
> +
> +/* Refer to the "Late Bind based Firmware Layout" documentation entry for details */
> +static int parse_cpd_header(struct xe_late_bind_fw *lb_fw,
> +			    const void *data, size_t size, const char *manifest_entry)
> +{
> +	struct xe_device *xe = late_bind_fw_to_xe(lb_fw);
> +	const struct gsc_cpd_header_v2 *header = data;
> +	const struct gsc_manifest_header *manifest;
> +	const struct gsc_cpd_entry *entry;
> +	size_t min_size = sizeof(*header);
> +	u32 offset;
> +	int i;
> +
> +	/* manifest_entry is mandatory */
> +	xe_assert(xe, manifest_entry);
> +
> +	if (size < min_size || header->header_marker != GSC_CPD_HEADER_MARKER)
> +		return -ENOENT;
> +
> +	if (header->header_length < sizeof(struct gsc_cpd_header_v2)) {
> +		drm_err(&xe->drm, "%s late binding fw: Invalid CPD header length %u!\n",
> +			fw_id_to_name[lb_fw->id], header->header_length);
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +	}
> +
> +	min_size = header->header_length + sizeof(struct gsc_cpd_entry) * header->num_of_entries;
> +	if (size < min_size) {
> +		drm_err(&xe->drm, "%s late binding fw: too small! %zu < %zu\n",
> +			fw_id_to_name[lb_fw->id], size, min_size);
> +		return -ENODATA;
> +	}
> +
> +	/* Look for the manifest first */
> +	entry = (void *)header + header->header_length;
> +	for (i = 0; i < header->num_of_entries; i++, entry++)
> +		if (strcmp(entry->name, manifest_entry) == 0)
> +			offset = entry->offset & GSC_CPD_ENTRY_OFFSET_MASK;
> +
> +	if (!offset) {
This for loop looks suspicious. Do you continue the loop on purpose
after finding the first match? Or should there be a break?
Also, if there is no match then offset is uninitialized. Isn't it better
to initialize offset at the start?
-- 
Kees