linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH] Thermal: Fix bug on generic thermal framework.

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: <4D68720C2E767A4AA6A8796D42C8EB591D1396@BGSMSX101.gar.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Tue, 25 Sep 2012 03:04:57 +0000
From:	"R, Durgadoss" <durgadoss.r@...el.com>
To:	"Zhang, Rui" <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
	"jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com" <jonghwa3.lee@...sung.com>
CC:	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Brown, Len" <len.brown@...el.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...k.pl>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Amit Kachhap <amit.kachhap@...aro.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Thermal: Fix bug on generic thermal framework.

Hi Rui,

> > > Hi, Jonghwa,
> > >
> > > I still do not understand what the problem is.
> > > Say if a cooling device fails to bind, the thermal zone device would
> > > still work properly, just like the failure cooling device is not
> > > referenced in this thermal zone.
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > > rui
> > Hi rui,
> > No, it doesn't work properly. If it fails to bind some cool dev to
> > thermal zone device, it frees thermal zone
> > device without canceling delayed work. After freeing thermal zone
> > device, system may call work function
> > pointed NULL as the timer expired. Thus it requires skipping the
> > initialization of polling work or canceling before
> > the unregister.
> 
> 
> hah, I see what the problem is.
> ideally, if we fail to bind one cooling device, we should just ignore it
> and continue to bind other, what do you think?

Yes, this is what we should do.

> 
> does the patch below fix your problem?
> If yes, I'll try to rebase it on top of my next tree.

This is already fixed in your -next tree, since you applied the
fair share patches 10/15. The function bind_tz(tz) does the
exact same thing, and continues.

Thanks,
Durga