linux-kernel - Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH 0/3] repair RTC subsys (for i.MX)

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Thu, 5 May 2011 11:31:23 +0200
From:	Wolfram Sang <w.sang@...gutronix.de>
To:	rtc-linux@...glegroups.com
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, john stultz <johnstul@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [rtc-linux] Re: [PATCH 0/3] repair RTC subsys (for i.MX)

On Wed, May 04, 2011 at 03:30:59PM -0700, john stultz wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-05-04 at 17:31 +0200, Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > The recent updates to the RTC subsystem (removing UIE interrupts and use
> > alarms instead) introduced two problems for i.MX (and the subsys in
> > general, I'd think):
> > 
> > a) because registering the rtc now calls get_alarm(), the requirement
> > has been added for a lot of drivers that drvdata is properly set up
> > _before_ registering. rtc-mxc did not do that (probably bad; but as said
> > like a lot of other rtc-drivers currently) and oopsed.
> > 
> > b) the callbacks to the rtc-core for update_irqs have been removed, but
> > irq-handlers are still there, now being unused cruft. In case of
> > rtc-mxc, this is only one if-block, but for rtc-mc13xxx.c this is a
> > seperate handler.
> > 
> > From a glimpse, most platform drivers seem to have at least one of these
> > problems now :( John, am I correct or am I missing something?
> 
> I've tried to go through and clean up most of the b) issues, although
> some have apparently slipped by. Please let me know of any others you
> ran across.

I discovered it when working on the rtc-stmp3xxx driver. For this, I
will send a patch series in a few minutes, because there are more things
to be done there. Grepping for 'RTC_UF' should point to other areas of
interest.

> And indeed we've hit a few of issue a) already, so I should probably run
> through and do a full audit.

I hacked a q'n'd coccinelle-script pointing out potential candidates. It
found two more for which I will send patches, too. But I think a
seperate audit would be a good idea, just to be sure.

> Your patches look fine to me. Do you intend to push them or should I
> queue them up?

I'd say they should go via your tree.

Thanks,

   Wolfram

-- 
Pengutronix e.K.                           | Wolfram Sang                |
Industrial Linux Solutions                 | http://www.pengutronix.de/  |

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (199 bytes)