Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180228012802.GG14069@wotan.suse.de>
References: <20180224024613.24078-1-mcgrof@kernel.org> <20180224024613.24078-8-mcgrof@kernel.org>
 <CAGXu5jKoRsXm00=dQePgrjF+EauphKnPQXVgL=rv_d579eNE7g@mail.gmail.com> <20180228012802.GG14069@wotan.suse.de>
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Date:   Tue, 27 Feb 2018 21:33:28 -0800
Message-ID: <CAGXu5j+tFg+rGn5baCFRF5ARwExuD45oRE=dmzB8T84XDL=f-w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 07/11] firmware: split firmware fallback functionality
 into its own file
To:     "Luis R. Rodriguez" <mcgrof@kernel.org>,
        Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Martin Fuzzey <mfuzzey@parkeon.com>,
        Mimi Zohar <zohar@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, pali.rohar@gmail.com,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>, arend.vanspriel@broadcom.com,
        =?UTF-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>,
        nbroeking@me.com, Vikram Mulukutla <markivx@codeaurora.org>,
        stephen.boyd@linaro.org, Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>,
        David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Abhay_Salunke@dell.com, bjorn.andersson@linaro.org,
        jewalt@lgsinnovations.com, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 5:28 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 03:14:53PM -0800, Kees Cook wrote:
>> On Fri, Feb 23, 2018 at 6:46 PM, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org> wrote:
>> > The firmware fallback code is optional. Split that code out to help
>> > distinguish the fallback functionlity from othere core firmware loader
>> > features. This should make it easier to maintain and review code
>> > changes.
>> >
>> > The reason for keeping the configuration onto a table which is built-in
>> > if you enable firmware loading is so that we can later enable the kernel
>> > after subsequent patches to tweak this configuration, even if the
>> > firmware loader is modular.
>> >
>> > This introduces no functional changes.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@kernel.org>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/base/Makefile                  |   4 +-
>> >  drivers/base/firmware_fallback.c       | 661 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> >  drivers/base/firmware_fallback.h       |  61 +++
>> >  drivers/base/firmware_fallback_table.c |  29 ++
>> >  drivers/base/firmware_loader.c         | 803 +--------------------------------
>> >  drivers/base/firmware_loader.h         | 115 +++++
>> >  6 files changed, 874 insertions(+), 799 deletions(-)
>> >  create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback.c
>> >  create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback.h
>> >  create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_fallback_table.c
>> >  create mode 100644 drivers/base/firmware_loader.h
>>
>> Does it make sense to have a separate subdirectory for firmware
>> instead? I did this _ stuff with lkdtm and have regretted it. (I'm
>> likely going to make a subdirectory for it this cycle...)
>
> Sure, the only eyesore is that drivers/base/firmware.c what is that for?
>
> drivers/base/firmware_loader/ ok?

Yeah? Seems fine to me. Greg, do you have thoughts on this?

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook
Pixel Security