On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 3:40 PM Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevche...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 4:30 PM Jens Wiklander > <jens.wiklan...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 2:01 PM Andy Shevchenko > > <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 01:35:51PM +0200, Jens Wiklander wrote: > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2021 at 4:58 PM Andy Shevchenko > > > > <andriy.shevche...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > Thanks for review, my answer below. > > > > > > > > struct optee_msg_param_tmem tmem; > > > > > struct optee_msg_param_rmem rmem; > > > > > struct optee_msg_param_value value; > > > > > + uuid_t uuid; > > > > > > > > It's nice to get rid of the cast above, but I'm not that keen on the > > > > change in this struct. This file defines the ABI towards Secure world > > > > and adding dependencies on external complex types is a larger problem > > > > than the cast above in my opinion. > > > > > > I understand. > > > > > > So, the cast is simply wrong there. Can you add a comment above that cast > > > to > > > explain that and make it is marked as FIXME? Because there is no > > > guarantee that > > > internal Linux types can be 1:1 mapped to the ABI of something. > > > > We might as well fix it directly instead. How about storing the > > intermediate result in a proper uuid_t and then export it as: > > export_uuid((u8 *)&msg_arg->params[1].u.uuid, &myuuid); > > Still a casting here. > With u64 members you have a (potential) endianness issue (consider > BE-32 platform). Also you never know that a b c translates properly to > byte array. > > I would rather see a custom function > > optee_import_uuid(param, uuid_t *uuid) > { > u8 uuid_raw[UUID_SIZE]; > > put_unaligned_le64(&uuid_raw[0], param.a); // not sure about endianness > put_unaligned_le64(&uuid_raw[0], param.b); // ditto
I believe it's a memcpy() we want then, since UUIDs are supposed to be transmitted using a big endian memory pattern. We should perhaps add u8 octets[24]; to that union. Then should the result be well defined using export_uuid(). > > import_uuid(); > } > > > > What you need, perhaps, is a middle layer function that will copy u64 data > > > to uuid_t or so. Also, u64 is not an ABI type, why the respective __uXX > > > variants are not in use? > > > > Does it make any difference? The file isn't shared with user space and > > I need to sync the file manually anyway since OP-TEE doesn't have the > > same include files. > > Yes. It gives a hint that these are ABI (that's why I felt free to add > a member to the union. I have no idea that's an ABI). Optionally a > comment suggesting that. It does say that it defines a protocol at the beginning of the file, I can add ABI too if you think that helps. Cheers, Jens