linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier

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: <20160411124931.GD3351@sirena.org.uk>
Date:	Mon, 11 Apr 2016 13:49:31 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Cc:	Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Javier Martinez Canillas <javier@....samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] regulator: core: Resolve supply earlier

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 01:19:26PM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
> On 11/04/16 12:46, Thierry Reding wrote:

> > Perhaps moving the locking of the regulator_list_mutex down instead
> > could work. It seems to me like the first place where it would need to
> > be held is set_machine_constraints().

> Yes either that or we add a variable to regulator_resolve_supply() and
> regulator_dev_lookup() that indicates if the mutex is already held.

No, that sort of conditional locking is horrible and error prone.

> Moving the acquistion of mutex would be best/cleaner if that is ok.

Yes, we need to reorganize the locking.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (474 bytes)