From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751528AbcGMXwa (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:52:30 -0400 Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:48586 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751414AbcGMXwW (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 19:52:22 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,359,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="733856028" Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 07:52:07 +0800 From: Fengguang Wu To: "Luis R. Rodriguez" Cc: ming.lei@canonical.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mmarek@suse.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, markivx@codeaurora.org, stephen.boyd@linaro.org, zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, broonie@kernel.org, tiwai@suse.de, johannes@sipsolutions.net, chunkeey@googlemail.com, hauke@hauke-m.de, jwboyer@fedoraproject.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, dwmw2@infradead.org, jslaby@suse.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, luto@amacapital.net, rpurdie@rpsys.net, j.anaszewski@samsung.com, Abhay_Salunke@dell.com, Julia.Lawall@lip6.fr, Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr, nicolas.palix@imag.fr, teg@jklm.no, dhowells@redhat.com, martin.blumenstingl@googlemail.com, nbd@nbd.name, mark.rutland@arm.com, robh+dt@kernel.org, arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com, dev@kresin.me, kvalo@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues Message-ID: <20160713235207.GA20304@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> References: <1466117661-22075-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20160707005644.GF31219@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160707005644.GF31219@wotan.suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.0 (2016-04-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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