linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V6 1/6] regmap: irq: dispose all virtual irq before removing domain

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:	Tue, 9 Feb 2016 19:28:16 +0530
From:	Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To:	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>,
	<lee.jones@...aro.org>, <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
	<k.kozlowski@...sung.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
	<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, <a.zummo@...ertech.it>
CC:	<cw00.choi@...sung.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	<rtc-linux@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 1/6] regmap: irq: dispose all virtual irq before removing
 domain


On Tuesday 09 February 2016 06:57 PM, Javier Martinez Canillas wrote:
> Hello Laxman,
>
> On 02/09/2016 09:28 AM, Laxman Dewangan wrote:
>> It is require to dispose all virtual irq of hwirq on chip
>> created on given irq domain before removing this irq domain.
>> Hence dispose all mapped irqs before deleting the irq domains
>> in regmap_del_irq_chip();
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
>>
>
> I believe this patch could be picked separately and not made part of
> this series since is fixing a bug that happens on most drivers using
> the regmap-irq API. This will avoid cross-subsystem churn for people.
>
> Your patch 6/6 does not introduce a regression since the bug already
> exists in the MFD driver, it just makes it more noticeable since it
> is easier to unbind the max77686 RTC driver than the MFD one.


If we dont have fix then rtc unbind/bind creates issue on S2R. Although 
it was issue on tot but the issue visible with my patch only.

So if you test my 2 to 6 without 1, you will see issue.

So to avoid bisect issue in functionality wise, this should go on 
sequence. This is my view.