Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:52:07 +0800 | From | Fengguang Wu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues |
| |
Hi Luis,
On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:56:44AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:54:16PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> The firmware API has had some issues a while ago, some of this is >> not well documented, and its still hard to grasp. This documents >> some of these issues, adds SmPL grammar rules to enable us to hunt >> for issues, and annotations to help us with our effort to finally >> compartamentalize that pesky usermode helper. >> >> Previously this was just one patch, the grammar rule to help >> find request firmware API users on init or probe, this series >> extends that effort with usermode helper grammar rules, and some >> annotations and documentation on the firmware_class driver to >> avoid further issues. Documenting the usermode helper and making >> it clear why we cannot remove it is important for analysis for >> the next series which adds the new flexible sysdata firmware API. >> >> This series depends on the coccicheck series which enables >> annotations on coccinelle patches to require a specific >> version of coccinelle [0], as such coordination with Michal is >> in order. > >Michal is out until July 11, and upon further thought such coordination >is not need, the annotation is in place as comments and as such >merging this now won't have any negative effects other than the version >check. Also the patches in question for the coccicheck change are all >acked now and I expect them to be merged anyway. > >Which tree should firmware changes go through ?
>> This series is also further extended next with the new sydata >> API, the full set of changes is available on my linux-next tree [1]. >> >> Perhaps now a good time to discuss -- if 0-day should enable the rule >> scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci to be called on >> every 0-day iteration, it runs rather fast and it should help police >> against avoiding futher explicit users of the usermode helper. > >And if we are going to merge this anyone oppose enabling hunting >for further explicit users of the usermode helper using grammar through >0-day ?
When *.cocci scripts lands upstream they'll be auto picked up by the 0-day bot to guard new patches/commits. Are there further steps 0-day should do for request_firmware-upstream.cocci?
Thanks, Fengguang
>> >> [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1466116292-21843-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@kernel.org >> [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mcgrof/linux-next.git/log/?h=20160616-sysdata-v2 >> >> Luis R. Rodriguez (5): >> MAINTAINERS: extend firmware_class maintainer list >> firmware: annotate thou shalt not request fw on init or probe >> firmware: update usermode helper docs and add SmPL report >> firmware: add usermode helper DECLARE_FW_LOADER_USER() annotation >> firmware: fix fw cache to avoid usermode helper on suspend >> >> Documentation/firmware_class/README | 59 +++++++++- >> MAINTAINERS | 1 + >> drivers/base/Kconfig | 2 +- >> drivers/base/firmware_class.c | 2 +- >> drivers/firmware/dell_rbu.c | 1 + >> drivers/leds/leds-lp55xx-common.c | 1 + >> include/linux/firmware.h | 7 ++ >> .../request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci | 130 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> .../coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci | 44 +++++++ >> 9 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci >> create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci >> >> -- >> 2.8.2 >> >> > >-- >Luis Rodriguez, SUSE LINUX GmbH >Maxfeldstrasse 5; D-90409 Nuernberg
| |