linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v7 10/42] clk: davinci: New driver for davinci PSC clocks

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMRc=Me-OCQjB-q8iV5k-n00-iF8aH-UU444iL1zCN=DdKnwzA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Mar 2018 11:26:35 +0100
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-devicetree <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
        arm-soc <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...eaurora.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Sekhar Nori <nsekhar@...com>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Adam Ford <aford173@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 10/42] clk: davinci: New driver for davinci PSC clocks

2018-03-16 18:55 GMT+01:00 Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>:
> Quoting Bartosz Golaszewski (2018-02-28 04:38:38)
>> 2018-02-19 21:21 GMT+01:00 David Lechner <david@...hnology.com>:
>>
>> I believe there to be two issues: one is with v7 - we need to increase
>> the clock reference count in davinci_psc_genpd_attach_dev().
>>
>> Second is the error path in the clock framework - we should remove the
>> destroyed clk_core from the debug list, which is not being done now.
>>
>> Why we even need to track the refcount of clk_core is a mistery for me
>> though. Stephen, Mike?
>>
>
> Which part of the code are we talking about? I see that
> __clk_core_init() calls clk_debug_register() when ret == 0 and that
> looks fine. I do wonder why clk_debug_register() even returns a value
> though because we ignore it.

Hi Stephen,

invalid usage of clock pm ops was the culprit here. I just had not
understood why we count references in the CCF - now I get it so
nevermind this mail.

Thanks,
Bart