linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 9 Jun 2014 23:22:06 +0200
From:	abdoulaye berthe <berthe.ab@...il.com>
To:	Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>
Cc:	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, m@...s.ch,
	"linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio: gpiolib: set gpiochip_remove retval to void

How about using the interface tracker described in the link bellow ?
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/5/5/55
Abdoulaye.



On Sun, Jun 8, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 3:22 AM, abdoulaye berthe <berthe.ab@...il.com> wrote:
>> This avoids handling gpiochip remove error in device
>> remove handler.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: abdoulaye berthe <berthe.ab@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c      | 24 +++++++-----------------
>>  include/linux/gpio/driver.h |  2 +-
>>  2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> index f48817d..022543f 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib.c
>> @@ -1263,10 +1263,9 @@ static void gpiochip_irqchip_remove(struct gpio_chip *gpiochip);
>>   *
>>   * A gpio_chip with any GPIOs still requested may not be removed.
>>   */
>> -int gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>> +void gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>>  {
>>         unsigned long   flags;
>> -       int             status = 0;
>>         unsigned        id;
>>
>>         acpi_gpiochip_remove(chip);
>> @@ -1278,24 +1277,15 @@ int gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip)
>>         of_gpiochip_remove(chip);
>>
>>         for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++) {
>> -               if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &chip->desc[id].flags)) {
>> -                       status = -EBUSY;
>> -                       break;
>> -               }
>> -       }
>> -       if (status == 0) {
>> -               for (id = 0; id < chip->ngpio; id++)
>> -                       chip->desc[id].chip = NULL;
>> -
>> -               list_del(&chip->list);
>> +               if (test_bit(FLAG_REQUESTED, &chip->desc[id].flags))
>> +                       panic("gpio: removing gpiochip with gpios still requested\n");
>
> Really, really I don't think we should panic here. Apparently if you
> don't do this things are going to crash later on some platforms. Could
> you detail what the problem is exactly so we can try and come with a
> solution?
>
> Event if we crash later with a more obscure reason, using pr_err()
> here to provide some information should be helpful enough.
>
> Alex.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/