From: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
To: <linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org>
Cc: "Brian Norris" <computersforpeace@gmail.com>,
"Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>,
"Ezequiel Garcia" <ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar>,
"Boris Brezillon" <boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
"Bayi Cheng" <bayi.cheng@mediatek.com>,
"Marek Vasut" <marex@denx.de>,
djkurtz@chromium.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 4/8] mtd: spi-nor: disallow further writes to SR if WP# is low
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 11:25:33 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1454095537-130536-5-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1454095537-130536-1-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com>
Locking the flash is most useful if it provides real hardware security.
Otherwise, it's little more than a software permission bit.
A reasonable use case that provides real HW security might be like
follows:
(1) hardware WP# is deasserted
(2) program flash
(3) flash range is protected via status register
(4) hardware WP# is asserted
(5) flash protection range can no longer be changed, until WP# is
deasserted
In this way, flash protection is co-owned by hardware and software.
Now, one would expect to be able to perform step (3) with
ioctl(MEMLOCK), except that the spi-nor driver does not set the Status
Register Protect bit (a.k.a. Status Register Write Disable (SRWD)), so
even though the range is now locked, it does not satisfy step (5) -- it
can still be changed by a call to ioctl(MEMUNLOCK).
So, let's enable status register protection after the first lock
command, and disable protection only when the flash is fully unlocked.
Signed-off-by: Brian Norris <computersforpeace@gmail.com>
---
v2:
* added clearing the SRWD bit when unlocking the entire flash
drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c | 7 +++++++
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
index 68133b949fe5..54eaf4b5bf05 100644
--- a/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
+++ b/drivers/mtd/spi-nor/spi-nor.c
@@ -540,6 +540,9 @@ static int stm_lock(struct spi_nor *nor, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
status_new = (status_old & ~mask) | val;
+ /* Disallow further writes if WP pin is asserted */
+ status_new |= SR_SRWD;
+
/* Don't bother if they're the same */
if (status_new == status_old)
return 0;
@@ -605,6 +608,10 @@ static int stm_unlock(struct spi_nor *nor, loff_t ofs, uint64_t len)
status_new = (status_old & ~mask) | val;
+ /* Don't protect status register if we're fully unlocked */
+ if (lock_len == mtd->size)
+ status_new &= ~SR_SRWD;
+
/* Don't bother if they're the same */
if (status_new == status_old)
return 0;
--
2.7.0.rc3.207.g0ac5344
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-01-29 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-01-29 19:25 [PATCH v2 0/8] mtd: spi-nor: locking fixes and updates Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 1/8] mtd: spi-nor: wait for SR_WIP to clear on initial unlock Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 2/8] mtd: spi-nor: silently drop lock/unlock for already locked/unlocked region Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 3/8] mtd: spi-nor: make lock/unlock bounds checks more obvious and robust Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` Brian Norris [this message]
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 5/8] mtd: spi-nor: use BIT() for flash_info flags Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 6/8] mtd: spi-nor: add SPI_NOR_HAS_LOCK flag Brian Norris
2016-02-28 19:23 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 7/8] mtd: spi-nor: add TB (Top/Bottom) protect support Brian Norris
2016-02-29 20:35 ` Ezequiel Garcia
2016-03-08 2:12 ` Brian Norris
2016-01-29 19:25 ` [PATCH v2 8/8] mtd: spi-nor: support lock/unlock for a few Winbond chips Brian Norris
2016-02-27 2:04 ` [PATCH v2 0/8] mtd: spi-nor: locking fixes and updates Ezequiel Garcia
2016-03-08 2:18 ` Brian Norris
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1454095537-130536-5-git-send-email-computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--to=computersforpeace@gmail.com \
--cc=bayi.cheng@mediatek.com \
--cc=boris.brezillon@free-electrons.com \
--cc=djkurtz@chromium.org \
--cc=ezequiel@vanguardiasur.com.ar \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=marex@denx.de \
--cc=zajec5@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).