linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] cpufreq-dt: defer probing if OPP table is not ready

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]

Date:	Tue, 16 Dec 2014 11:08:27 +0530
From:	Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org>
Cc:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
	Lucas Stach <l.stach@...gutronix.de>,
	Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@...e-electrons.com>,
	Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
	Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>,
	"linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cpufreq-dt: defer probing if OPP table is not ready

On 16 December 2014 at 11:02, Dmitry Torokhov <dtor@...omium.org> wrote:
> Yes we will. Which simply means that this WARN is stupid. We also will
> hit it if there is no opp table and the allocation below fails; or if
> it succeeds then dev_pm_opp_init_cpufreq_table() will fail and we'll
> hit this code path again.
>
> We should either drop that WARN() or handle -ENODEV there properly.

Yeah, we should drop it. Its just too hard for such cases. You will take care
of that in your series?

For your patch:

Reviewed-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>

--
viresh
--
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/