summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorAli Ahmet Memis <ali@iusegentoo.com>2026-08-21 01:45:27 +0000
committerStafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>2026-08-29 07:32:26 +0100
commit78004e9a87f240df03e2f73120d291763c32e0a7 (patch)
tree137c22dd795222931b9d2bf2501d37cd766741aa /Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
downloadlinux-stable-78004e9a87f240df03e2f73120d291763c32e0a7.tar.gz
linux-stable-78004e9a87f240df03e2f73120d291763c32e0a7.zip
openrisc: fix arbitrary kernel memory access via or1k_atomic syscallgrafted
sys_or1k_atomic() (syscall 244 in the "or1k" ABI) takes two user pointers, v1 and v2, and swaps the words they point to in hand-written assembly. l.lwz r29,0(r4) l.lwz r27,0(r5) l.sw 0(r4),r27 l.sw 0(r5),r29 The pointers are not checked with access_ok(). The four memory accesses also have no exception table entries. A caller passes a kernel address as either pointer, and the syscall reads from and writes to it directly. This gives an unprivileged process a kernel read/write primitive. It overwrites kernel data such as the sys_call_table, gaining code execution in kernel context. Check both pointers before entering the critical section. Add fixups for the four memory accesses so faults on valid but unmapped user addresses return -EFAULT. [shorne@gmail.com: fix comment style] Fixes: 9d02a4283e9c ("OpenRISC: Boot code") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Ali Ahmet Memis <ali@iusegentoo.com> Signed-off-by: Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst')
-rw-r--r--Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst69
1 files changed, 69 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..13ab13984
--- /dev/null
+++ b/Documentation/gpu/nova/guidelines.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@
+.. SPDX-License-Identifier: (GPL-2.0+ OR MIT)
+
+==========
+Guidelines
+==========
+
+This document describes the general project guidelines that apply to nova-core
+and nova-drm.
+
+Language
+========
+
+The Nova project uses the Rust programming language. In this context, all rules
+of the Rust for Linux project as documented in
+:doc:`../../rust/general-information` apply. Additionally, the following rules
+apply.
+
+- Unless technically necessary otherwise (e.g. uAPI), any driver code is written
+ in Rust.
+
+- Unless technically necessary, unsafe Rust code must be avoided. In case of
+ technical necessity, unsafe code should be isolated in a separate component
+ providing a safe API for other driver code to use.
+
+Style
+-----
+
+All rules of the Rust for Linux project as documented in
+:doc:`../../rust/coding-guidelines` apply.
+
+For a submit checklist, please also see the `Rust for Linux Submit checklist
+addendum <https://rust-for-linux.com/contributing#submit-checklist-addendum>`_.
+
+Documentation
+=============
+
+The availability of proper documentation is essential in terms of scalability,
+accessibility for new contributors and maintainability of a project in general,
+but especially for a driver running as complex hardware as Nova is targeting.
+
+Hence, adding documentation of any kind is very much encouraged by the project.
+
+Besides that, there are some minimum requirements.
+
+- Every non-private structure needs at least a brief doc comment explaining the
+ semantical sense of the structure, as well as potential locking and lifetime
+ requirements. It is encouraged to have the same minimum documentation for
+ non-trivial private structures.
+
+- uAPIs must be fully documented with kernel-doc comments; additionally, the
+ semantical behavior must be explained including potential special or corner
+ cases.
+
+- The APIs connecting the 1st level driver (nova-core) with 2nd level drivers
+ must be fully documented. This includes doc comments, potential locking and
+ lifetime requirements, as well as example code if applicable.
+
+- Abbreviations must be explained when introduced; terminology must be uniquely
+ defined.
+
+- Register addresses, layouts, shift values and masks must be defined properly;
+ unless obvious, the semantical sense must be documented. This only applies if
+ the author is able to obtain the corresponding information.
+
+Acceptance Criteria
+===================
+
+- Patches must only be applied if reviewed by at least one other person on the
+ mailing list; this also applies for maintainers.