linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] driver-core: platform: Resolve DT interrupt references late

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20140108214354.GG31323@atomide.com>
Date:	Wed, 8 Jan 2014 13:43:54 -0800
From:	Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
To:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:	Paul Walmsley <paul@...an.com>,
	Rob Herring <robherring2@...il.com>,
	Grant Likely <grant.likely@...aro.org>,
	Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] driver-core: platform: Resolve DT interrupt references
 late

* Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com> [140108 11:32]:
> On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 08:40:41AM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:
> > 
> > There's nothing wrong with the interrupt related code paths, we're just
> > trying to call the functions at a wrong time when thing are not yet
> > initialized.
> 
> The patch won't get rid of that warning, but it should at least restore
> things to a working state at runtime. At least for well-behaved drivers
> that use platform_get_irq() rather than those that try to access the
> resources directly.

Well the problem I'm seeing is these nasty warnings.

BTW, I think the issue you're talking about regarding platform_get_irq()
got fixed by 4a43d686fe33 (of/irq: Pass trigger type in IRQ resource flags).
 
> > Below is a repost of what works for me without using notifiers. Anybody
> > got any better ideas for a minimal fix?
> 
> That patch is somewhat big for something that should be a minimal fix.
> Being the size that it is it might have undesired side-effects that may
> not get noticed until it's way too late, so I'm hesitant to have
> something like this merged at this point in the release cycle.

Yes I agree it's rather invasive, but we also do have things pretty
badly broken in the kernel for device tree based booting. And it seems
that nobody has a smaller patch that would fix it.

Regards,

Tony
--
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/