linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] base: soc: Let soc_device_match() return no match when called too early

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: <CAK8P3a1Zuo-bgOuUyFjj_HscaMfwoAoGM2-W2EZ1a55ySE3wvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:39:00 +0100
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] [RFC] base: soc: Let soc_device_match() return no
 match when called too early

On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<geert+renesas@...der.be> wrote:
> If soc_device_match() is called before the SoC bus has been registered,
> bus_for_each_dev() returns -EINVAL, which is considered a match, as it
> is non-zero.
>
> While calling soc_device_match() can be considered an integration
> mistake, returning a match is counter-intuitive: soc_device_match() is
> typically used to handle quirks, i.e. to deviate from the default path.
> Hence add a check to abort checking and return no match instead.
>
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>
> ---

Acked-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>

> Should this use WARN_ONCE()?

I wouldn't mind that either, but your current version seems sufficient.