linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog 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: <53A84A51.8070507@roeck-us.net>
Date:	Mon, 23 Jun 2014 08:40:01 -0700
From:	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
CC:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>, wim@...ana.be,
	dbaryshkov@...il.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-watchdog@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/6] wdt: sunxi: Move restart code to the watchdog
 driver

On 06/23/2014 08:35 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Monday 23 June 2014 08:16:18 Guenter Roeck wrote:
>>> Moved to where?
>>>
>>> I certainly don't want it in the platform directories, and for arm64 we
>>> intentionally don't have a place to put this stuff.
>>>
>>
>> I have no idea, but setting the arm reset function pointer from a watchdog
>> driver doesn't seem like a good idea either. The arm code _does_ provide
>> and expect platform code to set the reset function, so having it in the arm
>> code would at least make more sense than expecting some unrelated driver
>> code to set it - especially since it is inherently racy [1].
>
> I don't think the race is inherent. We could solve the multiple registration
> problem and the unload problem using a notifier chain. If there are actually
> cases where we expect to see multiple reboot functions to be present in the
> system, we could go one step further and have a priority associated with
> it, so we try the best function first and fall back to soft_restart()
> if everything else fails.
>

You mean something like a restart notifier, which would be called from
architecture code (and replace the arm reset function pointer) ?
Yes, that sounds like a possible solution.

Guenter


--
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/