Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] platform/chrome: Fix a possible UAF via revocable

[Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>]

On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 11:24:10AM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Sept 2025 at 11:09, Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@kernel.org> wrote:
> > On 12/09/2025 10:17, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > > Cc: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
> > > Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@linaro.org>
> > > Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
> >
> > Thanks for the work. Just a note, please start using b4, so above Cc
> > will be propagated to all patches. Folks above received only the cover
> > letter...

Thank you for bringing this to my attention.  I wasn't aware of that and
will ensure this is handled correctly in the future.

> Thanks to Krzysztof for making me aware of this. Could you please Cc
> my brgl@bgdev.pl address on the next iteration.

Sure, will do.

> I haven't looked into the details yet but the small size of the first
> patch strikes me as odd. The similar changes I did for GPIO were quite
> big and they were designed just for a single sub-system.
> 
> During the talk you reference, after I suggested a library like this,
> Greg KH can be heard saying: do this for two big subsystems so that
> you're sure it's a generic solution. Here you're only using it in a
> single driver which makes me wonder if we can actually use it to
> improve bigger offenders, like for example I2C, or even replace the
> custom, SRCU-based solution in GPIO we have now. Have you considered
> at least doing a PoC in a wider kernel framework?

Yes, I'm happy to take this on.

To help me get started, could you please point me to some relevant code
locations?  Also, could you let me know if any specific physical devices
will be needed for testing?