linux-kernel - Re: PM regression in next

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:   Fri, 12 Jan 2018 21:15:35 +0000
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
Cc:     Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Kuninori Morimoto <kuninori.morimoto.gx@...esas.com>,
        Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        linux-pm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PM regression in next

On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 01:07:06PM -0800, Tony Lindgren wrote:

> (twl4030_dummy_read [snd_soc_twl4030]) from [<bf1cc3b4>]
>   (snd_soc_codec_drv_read+0x1c/0x28 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_codec_drv_read [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1da1cc>]
>   (snd_soc_dapm_new_widgets+0x29c/0x578 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_dapm_new_widgets [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1d2f30>]
>   (snd_soc_register_card+0xad0/0xe30 [snd_soc_core])
> (snd_soc_register_card [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf1e1850>]
>   (devm_snd_soc_register_card+0x30/0x70 [snd_soc_core])
> (devm_snd_soc_register_card [snd_soc_core]) from [<bf234364>]
>   (omap_twl4030_probe+0x100/0x1d0 [snd_soc_omap_twl4030])
> (omap_twl4030_probe [snd_soc_omap_twl4030]) from [<c0606660>]
>   (platform_drv_probe+0x50/0xb0)

So does the read not happen otherwise?  Or is it failing somehow and the
error getting ignored?

> So probably there are other asoc drivers broken too with these
> kind of patches until snd_soc_codec_drv_write() and
> snd_soc_codec_drv_read() are fixed?

I rather suspect someone would've noticed by now TBH - I suspect this is
more likely to be an issue with the rather baroque code that the TWL
drivers have possibly coupled with the whole multiple I2C devices issue.

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)