Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 14 Jul 2016 04:15:01 +0200 | From | "Luis R. Rodriguez" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues |
| |
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 07:52:07AM +0800, Fengguang Wu wrote: > Hi Luis, > > On Thu, Jul 07, 2016 at 02:56:44AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 03:54:16PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote: > >>The firmware API has had some issues a while ago, some of this is > >>not well documented, and its still hard to grasp. This documents > >>some of these issues, adds SmPL grammar rules to enable us to hunt > >>for issues, and annotations to help us with our effort to finally > >>compartamentalize that pesky usermode helper. > >> > >>Previously this was just one patch, the grammar rule to help > >>find request firmware API users on init or probe, this series > >>extends that effort with usermode helper grammar rules, and some > >>annotations and documentation on the firmware_class driver to > >>avoid further issues. Documenting the usermode helper and making > >>it clear why we cannot remove it is important for analysis for > >>the next series which adds the new flexible sysdata firmware API. > >> > >>This series depends on the coccicheck series which enables > >>annotations on coccinelle patches to require a specific > >>version of coccinelle [0], as such coordination with Michal is > >>in order. > > > >Michal is out until July 11, and upon further thought such coordination > >is not need, the annotation is in place as comments and as such > >merging this now won't have any negative effects other than the version > >check. Also the patches in question for the coccicheck change are all > >acked now and I expect them to be merged anyway. > > > >Which tree should firmware changes go through ? > > >>This series is also further extended next with the new sydata > >>API, the full set of changes is available on my linux-next tree [1]. > >> > >>Perhaps now a good time to discuss -- if 0-day should enable the rule > >>scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci to be called on > >>every 0-day iteration, it runs rather fast and it should help police > >>against avoiding futher explicit users of the usermode helper. > > > >And if we are going to merge this anyone oppose enabling hunting > >for further explicit users of the usermode helper using grammar through > >0-day ? > > When *.cocci scripts lands upstream they'll be auto picked up by the > 0-day bot to guard new patches/commits.
Great thanks!
> Are there further steps 0-day should do for request_firmware-upstream.cocci?
It just requires coccinelle >= 1.0.5.
Luis
| |