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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2022 14:37:04 +0100 From: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org> To: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc>, Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>, Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>, Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>, Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Li Yang <leoyang.li@....com>, Rafał Miłecki <rafal@...ecki.pl>, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com> Cc: linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Ahmad Fatoum <a.fatoum@...gutronix.de> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 07/14] nvmem: core: add per-cell post processing On 25/08/2022 22:44, Michael Walle wrote: > Instead of relying on the name the consumer is using for the cell, like > it is done for the nvmem .cell_post_process configuration parameter, > provide a per-cell post processing hook. This can then be populated by > the NVMEM provider (or the NVMEM layout) when adding the cell. > > Signed-off-by: Michael Walle <michael@...le.cc> > --- > drivers/nvmem/core.c | 16 ++++++++++++++++ > include/linux/nvmem-consumer.h | 5 +++++ > 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/nvmem/core.c b/drivers/nvmem/core.c > index 5357fc378700..cbfbe6264e6c 100644 > --- a/drivers/nvmem/core.c > +++ b/drivers/nvmem/core.c > @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct nvmem_cell_entry { > int bytes; > int bit_offset; > int nbits; > + nvmem_cell_post_process_t post_process; two post_processing callbacks for cells is confusing tbh, we could totally move to use of cell->post_process. one idea is to point cell->post_process to nvmem->cell_post_process during cell creation time which should clean this up a bit. Other option is to move to using layouts for every thing. prefixing post_process with read should also make it explicit that this callback is very specific to reads only. > struct device_node *np; > struct nvmem_device *nvmem; > struct list_head node; > @@ -468,6 +469,7 @@ static int nvmem_cell_info_to_nvmem_cell_entry_nodup(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, > cell->offset = info->offset; > cell->bytes = info->bytes; > cell->name = info->name; > + cell->post_process = info->post_process; > > cell->bit_offset = info->bit_offset; > cell->nbits = info->nbits; > @@ -1500,6 +1502,13 @@ static int __nvmem_cell_read(struct nvmem_device *nvmem, > if (cell->bit_offset || cell->nbits) > nvmem_shift_read_buffer_in_place(cell, buf); > > + if (cell->post_process) { > + rc = cell->post_process(nvmem->priv, id, index, > + cell->offset, buf, cell->bytes); > + if (rc) > + return rc; > + } > + > if (nvmem->cell_post_process) { > rc = nvmem->cell_post_process(nvmem->priv, id, index, > cell->offset, buf, cell->bytes); > @@ -1608,6 +1617,13 @@ static int __nvmem_cell_entry_write(struct nvmem_cell_entry *cell, void *buf, si > (cell->bit_offset == 0 && len != cell->bytes)) > return -EINVAL; > > + /* > + * Any cells which have a post_process hook are read-only because we > + * cannot reverse the operation and it might affect other cells, too. > + */ > + if (cell->post_process) > + return -EINVAL; Post process was always implicitly for reads only, this check should also tie the loose ends of cell_post_processing callback. --srini > + > if (cell->bit_offset || cell->nbits) { > buf = nvmem_cell_prepare_write_buffer(cell, buf, len); > if (IS_ERR(buf)) > diff --git a/include/linux/nvmem-consumer.h b/include/linux/nvmem-consumer.h > index 980f9c9ac0bc..761b8ef78adc 100644 > --- a/include/linux/nvmem-consumer.h > +++ b/include/linux/nvmem-consumer.h > @@ -19,6 +19,10 @@ struct device_node; > struct nvmem_cell; > struct nvmem_device; > > +/* duplicated from nvmem-provider.h */ > +typedef int (*nvmem_cell_post_process_t)(void *priv, const char *id, int index, > + unsigned int offset, void *buf, size_t bytes); > + > struct nvmem_cell_info { > const char *name; > unsigned int offset; > @@ -26,6 +30,7 @@ struct nvmem_cell_info { > unsigned int bit_offset; > unsigned int nbits; > struct device_node *np; > + nvmem_cell_post_process_t post_process; > }; > > /**
Powered by blists - more mailing lists