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

From: Fengguang Wu
Date: Wed Jul 13 2016 - 22:24:40 EST

On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 04:15:01AM +0200, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
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.

That looks easy. When do you estimate the script will land upstream?
So we can make sure upgrade coccinelle before that time.