On 11/29/17 08:31, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 11/27/17 15:58, Alan Tull wrote: >>> Here's a proposal for a whitelist to lock down the dynamic device tree. >>> >>> For an overlay to be accepted, all of its targets are required to be >>> on a target node whitelist. >>> >>> Currently the only way I have to get on the whitelist is calling a >>> function to add a node. That works for fpga regions, but I think >>> other uses will need a way of having adding specific nodes from the >>> base device tree, such as by adding a property like 'allow-overlay;' >>> or 'allow-overlay = "okay";' If that is acceptable, I could use some >>> advice on where that particular code should go. >>> >>> Alan >>> >>> Alan Tull (2): >>> of: overlay: add whitelist >>> fpga: of region: add of-fpga-region to whitelist >>> >>> drivers/fpga/of-fpga-region.c | 9 ++++++ >>> drivers/of/overlay.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> include/linux/of.h | 12 +++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 94 insertions(+) >>> >> >> The plan was to use connectors to restrict where an overlay could be applied. >> I would prefer not to have multiple methods for accomplishing the same thing >> unless there is a compelling reason to do so. > > Connector nodes need a mechanism to enable themselves, too. I don't > think connector nodes are going to solve every usecase. > > Rob > The overlay code related to connectors does not exist yet, so my comment is going to be theoretical. I would expect the overlay code to check that the target of the overlay fragment is a connector node, so there is no need to explicitly "enable" applying an overlay to a connector node. -Frank -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
