Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] firmware: add SmPL grammar to avoid issues

[Fengguang Wu]

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. Are there further steps 0-day
should do for request_firmware-upstream.cocci?

Thanks,
Fengguang

> > [0] https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1466116292-21843-1-git-send-email-mcgrof@xxxxxxxxxx
> > [1] https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/mcgrof/linux-next.git/log/?h=20160616-sysdata-v2
> >
> > Luis R. Rodriguez (5):
> >   MAINTAINERS: extend firmware_class maintainer list
> >   firmware: annotate thou shalt not request fw on init or probe
> >   firmware: update usermode helper docs and add SmPL report
> >   firmware: add usermode helper DECLARE_FW_LOADER_USER() annotation
> >   firmware: fix fw cache to avoid usermode helper on suspend
> >
> >  Documentation/firmware_class/README                |  59 +++++++++-
> >  MAINTAINERS                                        |   1 +
> >  drivers/base/Kconfig                               |   2 +-
> >  drivers/base/firmware_class.c                      |   2 +-
> >  drivers/firmware/dell_rbu.c                        |   1 +
> >  drivers/leds/leds-lp55xx-common.c                  |   1 +
> >  include/linux/firmware.h                           |   7 ++
> >  .../request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci   | 130 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  .../coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci |  44 +++++++
> >  9 files changed, 240 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >  create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-avoid-init-probe-init.cocci
> >  create mode 100644 scripts/coccinelle/api/request_firmware-usermode.cocci
> >
> > --
> > 2.8.2
>
> --
> Luis Rodriguez, SUSE LINUX GmbH
> Maxfeldstrasse 5; D-90409 Nuernberg