Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-07 Thread Alan Tull
On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:56 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 12/05/17 11:33, Alan Tull wrote: >> On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: >>> On 11/29/17 11:11, Alan Tull wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-06 Thread Frank Rowand
On 12/05/17 11:33, Alan Tull wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 11/29/17 11:11, Alan Tull wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Rob Herring wrote: On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 11/27/17 15:58, Alan Tull wrote:

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-06 Thread Frank Rowand
On 12/05/17 11:55, Alan Tull wrote: > On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 11/29/17 08:31, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand >>> wrote: On 11/27/17 15:58, Alan Tull wrote: > Here's a proposal for a whitelist to lock down the dynam

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-06 Thread Frank Rowand
On 11/30/17 09:39, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Frank Rowand wrote: >> On 11/29/17 04:20, Frank Rowand 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 o

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-05 Thread Alan Tull
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:18 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 11/29/17 08:31, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand 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

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-12-05 Thread Alan Tull
On Thu, Nov 30, 2017 at 6:46 AM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 11/29/17 11:11, Alan Tull wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >>> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand >>> wrote: On 11/27/17 15:58, Alan Tull wrote: > Here's a proposal for a whitelist to lock

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-30 Thread Rob Herring
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Frank Rowand wrote: > On 11/29/17 04:20, Frank Rowand 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 tar

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-30 Thread Frank Rowand
On 11/29/17 11:11, Alan Tull wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Rob Herring wrote: >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand 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 acc

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-30 Thread Frank Rowand
On 11/29/17 08:31, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand 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 targ

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-29 Thread Frank Rowand
On 11/29/17 04:20, Frank Rowand 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 ge

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-29 Thread Frank Rowand
On 11/29/17 04:20, Frank Rowand 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 ge

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-29 Thread Alan Tull
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Rob Herring wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand 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 b

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-29 Thread Rob Herring
On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 3:20 AM, Frank Rowand 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 w

Re: [RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-29 Thread Frank Rowand
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

[RFC 0/2] of: Add whitelist

2017-11-27 Thread Alan Tull
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 t