From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 07D4BC433EF for ; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:07:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:From:References:To:Subject: MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=82MSVziGibFwUSH3KyhrUD1NyYU719f3aw0tZ8wTrgE=; b=K9moWqtsb8BRy6 tKJRMYeLB7RzQq67B0wpHrnoPOLx3rDaLwI+dR2g1evupE0TROBxOtAIfKCexFhlUgMQP1ZYDsKZp t67gYWOf60o4/XlKGFsPtX/V9Pog+BLfbcMET3WJEubEsPBWZ5FtUvQNezgvLDjix0YCWzEQiz/im T1Pivo4wlmt8/fJ0SwpqIwdWRZpishn7W1egthNxr0YAJ5yIbJ1KGosKJlL0C7UVe3jL5TqlFpSRh NGqp+GZcqYXICrnZRmnDX6YsxML24wvejqIYOiJKv5gh2GA1WZ/xCypMXe9bK7vkDjjFjaqEABuqo N4BJNQVgMViDcwy56eDA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nKFJm-00609E-E0; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:05:42 +0000 Received: from lelv0142.ext.ti.com ([198.47.23.249]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nKFJN-005zyu-OI for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 08:05:19 +0000 Received: from fllv0035.itg.ti.com ([10.64.41.0]) by lelv0142.ext.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 21G85CJB089471; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 02:05:12 -0600 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ti.com; s=ti-com-17Q1; t=1644998712; bh=3UQwduVUZ+q8wif62BV/grOjAvJhZ7t6eekjdb8k+us=; h=Date:Subject:To:CC:References:From:In-Reply-To; b=dtmziO/5CXQ6QOxqCyUs6sD0TFQNQpbhjo/LSvPWpzGLinggT8s98SI/eZuOyNZyv eVD1vamxdgNHt5jlxOvjJ6YPKv69bdqsyhfxvCXWOB9Lp2Qnjo8+Owt1LIvAjYvL29 xy7DErcybvNB1BFZbR7+Wv2XSm6NyROSkVUHAxOM= Received: from DLEE109.ent.ti.com (dlee109.ent.ti.com [157.170.170.41]) by fllv0035.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 21G85Cgo055891 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Wed, 16 Feb 2022 02:05:12 -0600 Received: from DLEE101.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.31) by DLEE109.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.41) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2308.14; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 02:05:12 -0600 Received: from lelv0327.itg.ti.com (10.180.67.183) by DLEE101.ent.ti.com (157.170.170.31) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_CBC_SHA256_P256) id 15.1.2308.14 via Frontend Transport; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 02:05:12 -0600 Received: from [10.250.148.139] (ileax41-snat.itg.ti.com [10.172.224.153]) by lelv0327.itg.ti.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 21G8571R087433; Wed, 16 Feb 2022 02:05:08 -0600 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 13:35:07 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 Subject: Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] remoteproc: Introduce deny_sysfs_ops flag Content-Language: en-US To: Mathieu Poirier References: <20220209090342.13220-1-p-mohan@ti.com> <20220209090342.13220-2-p-mohan@ti.com> <20220210184802.GB3603040@p14s> From: Puranjay Mohan In-Reply-To: <20220210184802.GB3603040@p14s> X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: e1e8a2fd-e40a-4ac6-ac9b-f7e9cc9ee180 X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20220216_000517_991410_E5EA06CC X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 29.99 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: kishon@ti.com, vigneshr@ti.com, linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi Mathieu, On 11/02/22 00:18, Mathieu Poirier wrote: > Hi Puranjay, > > On Wed, Feb 09, 2022 at 02:33:41PM +0530, Puranjay Mohan wrote: >> The remoteproc framework provides sysfs interfaces for changing >> the firmware name and for starting/stopping a remote processor >> through the sysfs files 'state' and 'firmware'. The 'recovery' >> sysfs file can also be used similarly to control the error recovery >> state machine of a remoteproc. These interfaces are currently >> allowed irrespective of how the remoteprocs were booted (like >> remoteproc self auto-boot, remoteproc client-driven boot etc). >> These interfaces can adversely affect a remoteproc and its clients >> especially when a remoteproc is being controlled by a remoteproc >> client driver(s). Also, not all remoteproc drivers may want to >> support the sysfs interfaces by default. >> >> Add support to deny the sysfs state/firmware/recovery change by >> introducing a state flag 'deny_sysfs_ops' that the individual >> remoteproc drivers can set based on their usage needs. The default >> behavior is to allow the sysfs operations as before. >> >> Implement attribute_group->is_visible() to hide the sysfs >> state/firmware/recovery entries when deny_sysfs_ops flag is set. >> >> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan >> --- >> Changes in v3->v4: >> Use mode = 0444 in rproc_is_visible() to make the sysfs entries >> read-only when the deny_sysfs_ops flag is set. >> --- >> drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- >> include/linux/remoteproc.h | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> index ea8b89f97d7b..da2d0eecfa44 100644 >> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c >> @@ -230,6 +230,21 @@ static ssize_t name_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, >> } >> static DEVICE_ATTR_RO(name); >> >> +static umode_t rproc_is_visible(struct kobject *kobj, struct attribute *attr, >> + int n) >> +{ >> + struct device *dev = kobj_to_dev(kobj); >> + struct rproc *rproc = to_rproc(dev); >> + umode_t mode = attr->mode; >> + >> + if (rproc->deny_sysfs_ops && (attr == &dev_attr_recovery.attr || >> + attr == &dev_attr_firmware.attr || >> + attr == &dev_attr_state.attr)) > > I was wondering if we should also add coredump to this group to make it an all > or nothing option (name is already read only). I have sent a v5 where I have added coredump to this. > >> + mode = 0444; > > Much better. > >> + >> + return mode; >> +} >> + >> static struct attribute *rproc_attrs[] = { >> &dev_attr_coredump.attr, >> &dev_attr_recovery.attr, >> @@ -240,7 +255,8 @@ static struct attribute *rproc_attrs[] = { >> }; >> >> static const struct attribute_group rproc_devgroup = { >> - .attrs = rproc_attrs >> + .attrs = rproc_attrs, >> + .is_visible = rproc_is_visible, >> }; >> >> static const struct attribute_group *rproc_devgroups[] = { >> diff --git a/include/linux/remoteproc.h b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> index e0600e1e5c17..3849c66ce38f 100644 >> --- a/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> +++ b/include/linux/remoteproc.h >> @@ -523,6 +523,7 @@ struct rproc_dump_segment { >> * @table_sz: size of @cached_table >> * @has_iommu: flag to indicate if remote processor is behind an MMU >> * @auto_boot: flag to indicate if remote processor should be auto-started >> + * @deny_sysfs_ops: flag to not permit sysfs operations on state, firmware and recovery >> * @dump_segments: list of segments in the firmware >> * @nb_vdev: number of vdev currently handled by rproc >> * @elf_class: firmware ELF class >> @@ -562,6 +563,7 @@ struct rproc { >> size_t table_sz; >> bool has_iommu; >> bool auto_boot; >> + bool deny_sysfs_ops; > > Wouldn't "sysfs_read_only" make more sense? I agree, I have renamed it to sysfs_read_only in v5 patch > > > With or without the above and for this set: > > Reviewed-by: Mathieu Poirier Thanks. Puranjay Mohan > >> struct list_head dump_segments; >> int nb_vdev; >> u8 elf_class; >> -- >> 2.17.1 >> _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel