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;
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] remoteproc: Check for NULL firmwares in sysfs
 interface
To:     Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
CC:     Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
        Loic Pallardy <loic.pallardy@st.com>,
        <linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <20180915003725.17549-1-s-anna@ti.com>
 <20180915003725.17549-3-s-anna@ti.com>
 <a74114d9-e4d6-3f13-add8-2025d0d320f8@st.com>
From:   Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
Message-ID: <505f8177-9e27-d864-6355-2bc4171abf47@ti.com>
Date:   Tue, 2 Oct 2018 10:05:58 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/52.9.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <a74114d9-e4d6-3f13-add8-2025d0d320f8@st.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Arnaud,

On 10/02/2018 04:43 AM, Arnaud Pouliquen wrote:
> Hi Suman,
> 
> On 09/15/2018 02:37 AM, Suman Anna wrote:
>> The remoteproc framework provides a sysfs file 'firmware'
>> for modifying the firmware image name from userspace. Add
>> an additional check to ensure NULL firmwares are errored
>> out right away, rather than getting a delayed error while
>> requesting a firmware during the start of a remoteproc
>> later on.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Suman Anna <s-anna@ti.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c | 5 +++++
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> index 2142b3ea726e..ce93f4d710f3 100644
>> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_sysfs.c
>> @@ -49,6 +49,11 @@ static ssize_t firmware_store(struct device *dev,
>>  	}
>>  
>>  	len = strcspn(buf, "\n");
>> +	if (!len) {
>> +		dev_err(dev, "can't provide a NULL firmware\n");
>> +		err = -EINVAL;
>> +		goto out;
>> +	}

> This patch fixes only the case of a null name but not a bad name. So I'm
> not one hundred percent sure that it is relevant, as it treats only a
> part of the problem. But it's fine with me if it is accepted.

Yeah, it is a minor fix catching only NULL names. There is no way for
the interface to know a bad name until the corresponding firmware is
requested.

regards
Suman

> 
> Tested-by: Arnaud Pouliquen <arnaud.pouliquen@st.com>
> 
> Regards
> Arnaud
> 
>>  
>>  	p = kstrndup(buf, len, GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!p) {
>>