On Tue, 23 Feb 2021 at 09:49, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 23, 2021 at 8:41 AM Mathieu Poirier > <mathieu.poirier@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, 22 Feb 2021 at 15:48, Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Sun, Feb 21, 2021 at 11:18 PM Jindong Yue <jindong.yue@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > > > There are four different callback functions that are used for the > > > > rproc_handle_resource_t callback that all have different second > > > > parameter types. > > > > > > > > rproc_handle_vdev -> struct fw_rsc_vdev > > > > rproc_handle_trace -> struct fw_rsc_trace > > > > rproc_handle_devmem -> struct fw_rsc_devmem > > > > rproc_handle_carveout -> struct fw_rsc_carveout > > > > > > > > These callbacks are cast to rproc_handle_resource_t so that there is no > > > > error about incompatible pointer types. Unfortunately, this is a control > > > > flow integrity violation, which verifies that the callback function's > > > > types match the prototypes exactly before jumping. > > > > > > Thank you for sending the patch! It might be worth noting that Clang's > > > Control-Flow Integrity checking is currently used only in Android > > > kernels, so while the type mismatches are real and should be fixed, > > > they don't result in runtime errors without this feature. > > > > > > > To fix this, change the second parameter of all functions to void * and > > > > use a local variable with the correct type so that everything works > > > > properly. With this, we can remove casting to rproc_handle_resource_t > > > > for these functions. > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jindong Yue <jindong.yue@xxxxxxx> > > > > Reviewed-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@xxxxxxx> > > > > > > This looks correct to me. Please feel free to add: > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Sami Tolvanen <samitolvanen@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > Where is the original patch? I can't find it on the linux-remoteproc > > and linux-kernel mailing lists. > > Looks like it was sent to linux-remoteproc, but I also don't see it in > lore.kernel.org. Not sure what happened there. Jindong, perhaps it's > worth resending and including linux-kernel too? Something definitely happened because I can't find anything from Jindong on the linux-remoteproc list... A resend it indeed in order. > > Sami
