Re: [RFC PATCH v1 1/1] Add support for arm64 to carry ima measurement log in kexec_file_load

[Prakhar Srivastava <prsriva@linux.microsoft.com>]

On 9/18/2019 8:59 PM, Thiago Jung Bauermann wrote:
> Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.ibm.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, 2019-09-18 at 10:15 -0400, Mimi Zohar wrote:
>>
>>>> +	uint64_t tmp_start, tmp_end;
>>>> +
>>>> +	propStart = of_find_property(of_chosen, "linux,ima-kexec-buffer",
>>>> +				     NULL);
>>>> +	if (propStart) {
>>>> +		tmp_start = fdt64_to_cpu(*((const fdt64_t *) propStart));
>>>> +		ret = of_remove_property(of_chosen, propStart);
>>>> +		if (!ret) {
>>>> +			return ret;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +
>>>> +		propEnd = of_find_property(of_chosen,
>>>> +					   "linux,ima-kexec-buffer-end", NULL);
>>>> +		if (!propEnd) {
>>>> +			return -EINVAL;
>>>> +		}
>>>> +
>>>> +		tmp_end = fdt64_to_cpu(*((const fdt64_t *) propEnd));
>>>> +
>>>> +		ret = of_remove_property(of_chosen, propEnd);
>>>> +		if (!ret) {
>>>> +			return ret;
>>>> +		}
>>> There seems to be quite a bit of code duplication in this function and
>>> in ima_get_kexec_buffer().  It could probably be cleaned up with some
>>> refactoring.
>> Sorry, my mistake.  One calls of_get_property(), while the other calls
>> of_find_property().
> of_get_property() is a thin wrapper around of_find_property(), so if
> that's the only difference I think they can still be merged.

I will move to using of_get_property and see if i can reduce the code 
further.

Also address other comments by Mimi in my next iteration.

Thanks,

Prakhar Srivastava


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel