From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2740C46471 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 08:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812122172E for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 08:12:29 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 812122172E Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linuxfoundation.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726579AbeHGKZh (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2018 06:25:37 -0400 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:34250 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725798AbeHGKZg (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Aug 2018 06:25:36 -0400 Received: from localhost (unknown [194.244.16.108]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C3556C9D; Tue, 7 Aug 2018 08:12:25 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2018 10:12:22 +0200 From: "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" To: "Zhang, Ning A" Cc: "pombredanne@nexb.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "Li, Ting" , "yamada.masahiro@socionext.com" , "kstewart@linuxfoundation.org" , "markus@trippelsdorf.de" Subject: Re: [PATCH] firmware: make sure builtin firmware is page alignment Message-ID: <20180807081222.GB20894@kroah.com> References: <20180803014521.21527-1-ning.a.zhang@intel.com> <20180803053948.GB1852@kroah.com> <1533285744.20683.67.camel@intel.com> <20180803103121.GB6557@kroah.com> <1533520123.20683.71.camel@intel.com> <20180806140512.GA19844@kroah.com> <1533608851.20683.78.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1533608851.20683.78.camel@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 07, 2018 at 02:27:31AM +0000, Zhang, Ning A wrote: > 在 2018-08-06一的 16:05 +0200，gregkh@linuxfoundation.org写道： > > On Mon, Aug 06, 2018 at 01:48:44AM +0000, Zhang, Ning A wrote: > > > 在 2018-08-03五的 12:31 +0200，gregkh@linuxfoundation.org写道： > > > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 08:42:25AM +0000, Zhang, Ning A wrote: > > > > > 在 2018-08-03五的 07:39 +0200，Greg KH写道： > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 03, 2018 at 09:45:21AM +0800, Zhang Ning wrote: > > > > > > > when firmware is in filesystem, request_firmware will load > > > > > > > it, > > > > > > > and copy it to vmalloc memory, that is page align memory. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > but when firmware is builtin, it is 8 bytes or 4 bytes > > > > > > > alignment. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > make sure builtin firmware is page algnment, that can > > > > > > > simplify > > > > > > > algorithm > > > > > > > to handle firmware. > > > > > > > > > > > > How is it simplified?  I don't see any such change like that > > > > > > here > > > > > > :( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you for review this patch. > > > > > > > > > > When driver handles its firmware based on  page, like below: > > > > > > > > > > struct page *p; > > > > > p = vmalloc_to_page(fw->data);  // for filesystem > > > > > firmware > > > > > p = virt_to_page(fw->data); // for builtin firmware > > > > > > > > > > but if builtin firmware is not page alignment, page pointer for > > > > > builtin > > > > > firmware is wrong, it contains memory not belong to firmware. > > > > > drivers > > > > > has to use additional code to handle this.  > > > > > > > > > > if builtin firmware is also page alignment, no need additional > > > > > code > > > > > to > > > > > handle builtin firmware. simplified. > > > > > > > > But you did not change anything like this in your code, so why > > > > would > > > > I > > > > know this? > > > > > > I understand it is very difficult to review this patch without > > > context. > > > The driver is not opensource, I can't show the patch for driver. > > > > Then I can not accept your patch.  Go talk to your corporate lawyers > > about changing core kernel code for a closed source driver and what > > that > > implies about that closed driver (hint, your driver can not be > > closed...) :) > > It's very sad, "sad"? Again, please go discuss this with your corporate lawyers before thinking that this is even something that is possible to do. Hint, if I _were_ to accept this, they would be _VERY_ upset at both me, and you. I am trying to _save_ you problems, please realize this. greg k-h