linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] drivers: misc: use module_platform_driver

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: <CAHkwnC-3_dDM3JO8y3yeNFz7=fpP=MtZ9D-3cMH8rNF9C1NZBA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 20 Mar 2013 10:02:23 +0100
From:	Fabio Porcedda <fabio.porcedda@...il.com>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Cc:	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
	H Hartley Sweeten <hartleys@...ionengravers.com>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
	"linux-media@...r.kernel.org" <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-ide@...r.kernel.org" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>,
	"lm-sensors@...sensors.org" <lm-sensors@...sensors.org>,
	"linux-input@...r.kernel.org" <linux-input@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fbdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...retlab.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] drivers: misc: use module_platform_driver_probe()

On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 March 2013, Fabio Porcedda wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 19, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> wrote:
>> > On Tuesday 19 March 2013, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
>> >> Hmm, so we may have drivers that (now) work perfectly fine with
>> >> module_platform_driver_probe()/platform_driver_probe(), but will start
>> >> failing suddenly in the future?
>> >
>> > They will fail if someone changes the initialization order. That would
>> > already break drivers before deferred probing support (and was the reason
>> > we added feature in the first place), but now we can be much more liberal
>> > with the order in which drivers are initialized, except when they are
>> > using platform_driver_probe()
>> >
>> >> I guess we need a big fat WARN_ON(-EPROBE_DEFER) in
>> >> platform_driver_probe() to catch these?
>> >
>> > Yes, very good idea.
>>
>> If it's fine, I'll send a patch for that.
>
> That would be cool, yes. I looked at it earlier (after sending my email above)
> and couldn't find an easy way to do it though, because platform_drv_probe
> does not know whether it is called from platform_driver_probe or not.
>
> Maybe using something other than platform_driver_register would work here.
>
>         Arnd

I think we can check inside the  deferred_probe_work_func()
if the dev->probe function pointer is equal to platform_drv_probe_fail().

Regards
--
Fabio Porcedda
--
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/