From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751436AbcGNDfe (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:35:34 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:4875 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751149AbcGNDf3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 23:35:29 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,360,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="733924419" Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 11:35:05 +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, Philip Li Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues Message-ID: <20160714033505.GA26723@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> References: <1466117661-22075-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20160707005644.GF31219@wotan.suse.de> <20160713235207.GA20304@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <20160714021501.GH6239@wotan.suse.de> <20160714022336.GA24702@wfg-t540p.sh.intel.com> <20160714030812.GT6239@wotan.suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160714030812.GT6239@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 On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 05:08:12AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 10:23:36AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 04:15:01AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: >> >On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 07:52:07AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: >> >>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. >> > >> >Great thanks! >> > >> >>Are there further steps 0-day should do for request_firmware-upstream.cocci? >> > >> >It just requires coccinelle >= 1.0.5. >> >> That looks easy. > >Nice! > >> When do you estimate the script will land upstream? > >Well, this series has gone by a while now without any complaints, so >I was poking to see if they can be merged now. OK. >> So we can make sure upgrade coccinelle before that time. > >There is another series which modernizes coccicheck [0] for which I just poked >at as a well [1], one change which may be of importance to you is groks the >Requires: tag on top of an SmPL patch, with that we simply just skip an SmPL >patch if the version of coccinelle is older than the one specified, with that >in place you can just upgrade when you want -- you'd just gain support for more >SmPL patches when you do. Without that coccinelle would not work (fail) on the >SmPL patch when tried. For this reason I originally had suggested perhaps >this series should be carried by Michal. > >[0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1467238499-10889-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@kernel.org >[1] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20160713214539.GE6239@wotan.suse.de It's glad to know these improvements. We'll watch their progress and keep up in time. :) Thanks, Fengguang