On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 at 19:10, Tom Rini <tr...@konsulko.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 10:09:38AM +0000, Andrew Scull wrote: > > > Continuing the theme of making the virtio code resilient against > > corruption of the buffers shared with the device, this series focusses > > on the vring. This series is simpler and more self-contained than the > > series for virtio-pci! > > > > It follows the example of Linux by keeping a private copy of the > > descriptors and metadata for state tracking and only ever writing to the > > descriptors that are shared with the device. > > > > I was able to test these hardening steps in the sandbox by simulating > > device writes to the queues. I was also looking into testing the device > > drivers against a simulated device but the lack of an API to access the > > virtqueues meant this ended up being a hack. I've included that hack and > > the at the end of the series as an RFC. > > > > Andrew Scull (11): > > virtio_ring: Merge identical variables > > virtio_ring: Add helper to attach vring descriptor > > virtio_ring: Maintain a shadow copy of descriptors > > virtio_ring: Check used descriptors are chain heads > > dm: test: virtio: Test the virtio ring > > virtio: sandbox: Fix device features bitfield > > test: dm: virtio: Test notify before del_vqs > > virtio: sandbox: Bind RNG rather than block device > > test: dm: virtio: Test virtio device driver probing > > virtio: rng: Check length before copying > > RFC: test: dm: virtio: Test virtio-rng with faked device > > What does this series depend on? I got a failure to build on sandbox: > https://source.denx.de/u-boot/u-boot/-/jobs/422500#L104
Problem is from the final, RFC, patch on SPL where CONFIG_DM_RNG is not set so `dm_rng_read` isn't defined. I don't really understand the difference with SPL just yet, but I expect CONFIG_DM_RNG can be set. But in the meantime, it's also fine to drop that final patch from the series.
