linux-kernel - Re: Calling device_init_wakeup() on driver removal

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: <3852101.qr97BxrLhj@aspire.rjw.lan>
Date:   Sun, 15 Jan 2017 15:49:44 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
Cc:     Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Calling device_init_wakeup() on driver removal

On Saturday, January 14, 2017 08:46:05 PM Guenter Roeck wrote:
> Hi folks,

Hi,

> while looking through driver initialization and removal functions, I noticed that many drivers
> call device_init_wakeup(dev, false) in the removal function. Given that the driver is about
> to be removed, that doesn't make much sense to me, especially since device_wakeup_disable()
> is called from device_pm_remove() anyway.
> 
> Is it safe to assume that all those calls can be removed, or is there a possible reason for
> keeping them around ?

Removing them automatically might break things, because device_init_wakeup(dev, false)
also clears the power.can_wakeup flag and removes the "wakeup" attribute from sysfs.

I guess they could be removed safely in the majority of cases, though.

Thanks,
Rafael