linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: Fix CLK_SET_RATE_GATE flag validation in clk_set

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]

Message-ID: <CAJOA=zP4kS1CPry5nWo-mTba+9dAdK_a+rUrNCkQrzgixa3kRg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 15 May 2012 22:40:11 -0700
From:	"Turquette, Mike" <mturquette@...com>
To:	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...escale.com>
Cc:	Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>,
	Jamie Iles <jamie@...ieiles.com>,
	Jeremy Kerr <jeremy.kerr@...onical.com>,
	Magnus Damm <magnus.damm@...il.com>,
	Deepak Saxena <dsaxena@...aro.org>,
	Shawn Guo <shawn.guo@...escale.com>,
	Arnd Bergman <arnd.bergmann@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
	Rob Herring <rob.herring@...xeda.com>,
	Russell King <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...aro.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...ricsson.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@...nsource.wolfsonmicro.com>,
	Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Amit Kucheria <amit.kucheria@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: Fix CLK_SET_RATE_GATE flag validation in clk_set_rate().

On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Richard Zhao
<richard.zhao@...escale.com> wrote:
> On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 01:43:42PM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
>> The clk_set_rate() code shouldn't check the clock's enable count when
>> validating CLK_SET_RATE_GATE flag since the enable count could change after
>> the validation. Similar to clk_set_parent(), it should instead check the
>> prepare count. The prepare count should go to zero only when the end user
>> expects the clock to not be enabled in the future. Since the code already
>> grabs the prepare count before validation, it's not possible for prepare
>> count to change after validation and by association not possible for a well
>> behaving end user to enable the clock while the set rate is in progress.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <skannan@...eaurora.org>
> Reviewed-by: Richard Zhao <richard.zhao@...escale.com>

Looks good to me.  I'll take into clk-next for one final pull request
to arm-soc.

Thanks,
Mike
--
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/