netdev - Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] mctp pcc: Check before sending MCTP PCC response ACK

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: <a3f91c94-e829-4942-abde-193462769cba@amperemail.onmicrosoft.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2024 17:21:06 -0400
From: Adam Young <admiyo@...eremail.onmicrosoft.com>
To: Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>,
 admiyo@...amperecomputing.com
Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>, Jassi Brar
 <jassisinghbrar@...il.com>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
 Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Jeremy Kerr <jk@...econstruct.com.au>,
 Matt Johnston <matt@...econstruct.com.au>,
 "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet
 <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
 Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Huisong Li <lihuisong@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] mctp pcc: Check before sending MCTP PCC response
 ACK

>>+ * @shmem_base_addr: the virtual memory address of the shared buffer

>If you are only going to map this from this pointer for the
>initiator/responder shared memory region, maybe it would benefit
>from a more specific name?

I am not certain what would be more correct.

On 8/1/24 07:41, Jonathan Cameron wrote:

>> +	pchan->shmem_base_addr = devm_ioremap(chan->mbox->dev,
>> +					      pchan->chan.shmem_base_addr,
>> +					      pchan->chan.shmem_size);
> devm doesn't seem appropriate here given we have manual management
> of other resources, so the ordering will be different in remove
> vs probe.
>
> So I'd handle release of this manually in mbox_free_channel()

How fixed are you on this?  mbox_free_channel is the parent code, and 
knows nothing about this resource.  It does no specific resource cleanup.

The only place we could release it is in the pcc_mbox_free, but that is 
essentially a call to the parent function.

All other comments should be addressed in the next version.