[PATCH] powerpc: Cope with duplicate node & property names in /proc/device-tree
Various dodgy firmware might give us nodes and/or properties in the device tree with conflicting names. That's generally ok, except for when we export the device tree via /proc, so check when we're creating the proc device tree and munge names accordingly. Tested on a faked device tree with kexec, would be good if someone with actual bogus firmware could try it, but just for completeness. Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au> Signed-off-by: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
This commit is contained in:
parent
d0160bf0b3
commit
5149fa47ec
1 changed files with 81 additions and 24 deletions
|
@ -52,7 +52,8 @@ static int property_read_proc(char *page, char **start, off_t off,
|
|||
* Add a property to a node
|
||||
*/
|
||||
static struct proc_dir_entry *
|
||||
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *de, struct property *pp)
|
||||
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *de, struct property *pp,
|
||||
const char *name)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct proc_dir_entry *ent;
|
||||
|
||||
|
@ -60,14 +61,14 @@ __proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *de, struct property *pp)
|
|||
* Unfortunately proc_register puts each new entry
|
||||
* at the beginning of the list. So we rearrange them.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
ent = create_proc_read_entry(pp->name,
|
||||
strncmp(pp->name, "security-", 9)
|
||||
ent = create_proc_read_entry(name,
|
||||
strncmp(name, "security-", 9)
|
||||
? S_IRUGO : S_IRUSR, de,
|
||||
property_read_proc, pp);
|
||||
if (ent == NULL)
|
||||
return NULL;
|
||||
|
||||
if (!strncmp(pp->name, "security-", 9))
|
||||
if (!strncmp(name, "security-", 9))
|
||||
ent->size = 0; /* don't leak number of password chars */
|
||||
else
|
||||
ent->size = pp->length;
|
||||
|
@ -78,7 +79,7 @@ __proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *de, struct property *pp)
|
|||
|
||||
void proc_device_tree_add_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde, struct property *prop)
|
||||
{
|
||||
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(pde, prop);
|
||||
__proc_device_tree_add_prop(pde, prop, prop->name);
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
void proc_device_tree_remove_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde,
|
||||
|
@ -105,6 +106,69 @@ void proc_device_tree_update_prop(struct proc_dir_entry *pde,
|
|||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Various dodgy firmware might give us nodes and/or properties with
|
||||
* conflicting names. That's generally ok, except for exporting via /proc,
|
||||
* so munge names here to ensure they're unique.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
||||
static int duplicate_name(struct proc_dir_entry *de, const char *name)
|
||||
{
|
||||
struct proc_dir_entry *ent;
|
||||
int found = 0;
|
||||
|
||||
spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock);
|
||||
|
||||
for (ent = de->subdir; ent != NULL; ent = ent->next) {
|
||||
if (strcmp(ent->name, name) == 0) {
|
||||
found = 1;
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
spin_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
|
||||
|
||||
return found;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
static const char *fixup_name(struct device_node *np, struct proc_dir_entry *de,
|
||||
const char *name)
|
||||
{
|
||||
char *fixed_name;
|
||||
int fixup_len = strlen(name) + 2 + 1; /* name + #x + \0 */
|
||||
int i = 1, size;
|
||||
|
||||
realloc:
|
||||
fixed_name = kmalloc(fixup_len, GFP_KERNEL);
|
||||
if (fixed_name == NULL) {
|
||||
printk(KERN_ERR "device-tree: Out of memory trying to fixup "
|
||||
"name \"%s\"\n", name);
|
||||
return name;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
retry:
|
||||
size = snprintf(fixed_name, fixup_len, "%s#%d", name, i);
|
||||
size++; /* account for NULL */
|
||||
|
||||
if (size > fixup_len) {
|
||||
/* We ran out of space, free and reallocate. */
|
||||
kfree(fixed_name);
|
||||
fixup_len = size;
|
||||
goto realloc;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
if (duplicate_name(de, fixed_name)) {
|
||||
/* Multiple duplicates. Retry with a different offset. */
|
||||
i++;
|
||||
goto retry;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
printk(KERN_WARNING "device-tree: Duplicate name in %s, "
|
||||
"renamed to \"%s\"\n", np->full_name, fixed_name);
|
||||
|
||||
return fixed_name;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Process a node, adding entries for its children and its properties.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
|
@ -118,37 +182,30 @@ void proc_device_tree_add_node(struct device_node *np,
|
|||
|
||||
set_node_proc_entry(np, de);
|
||||
for (child = NULL; (child = of_get_next_child(np, child));) {
|
||||
/* Use everything after the last slash, or the full name */
|
||||
p = strrchr(child->full_name, '/');
|
||||
if (!p)
|
||||
p = child->full_name;
|
||||
else
|
||||
++p;
|
||||
|
||||
if (duplicate_name(de, p))
|
||||
p = fixup_name(np, de, p);
|
||||
|
||||
ent = proc_mkdir(p, de);
|
||||
if (ent == 0)
|
||||
break;
|
||||
proc_device_tree_add_node(child, ent);
|
||||
}
|
||||
of_node_put(child);
|
||||
for (pp = np->properties; pp != 0; pp = pp->next) {
|
||||
/*
|
||||
* Yet another Apple device-tree bogosity: on some machines,
|
||||
* they have properties & nodes with the same name. Those
|
||||
* properties are quite unimportant for us though, thus we
|
||||
* simply "skip" them here, but we do have to check.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
spin_lock(&proc_subdir_lock);
|
||||
for (ent = de->subdir; ent != NULL; ent = ent->next)
|
||||
if (!strcmp(ent->name, pp->name))
|
||||
break;
|
||||
spin_unlock(&proc_subdir_lock);
|
||||
if (ent != NULL) {
|
||||
printk(KERN_WARNING "device-tree: property \"%s\" name"
|
||||
" conflicts with node in %s\n", pp->name,
|
||||
np->full_name);
|
||||
continue;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
ent = __proc_device_tree_add_prop(de, pp);
|
||||
for (pp = np->properties; pp != 0; pp = pp->next) {
|
||||
p = pp->name;
|
||||
|
||||
if (duplicate_name(de, p))
|
||||
p = fixup_name(np, de, p);
|
||||
|
||||
ent = __proc_device_tree_add_prop(de, pp, p);
|
||||
if (ent == 0)
|
||||
break;
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue