linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mmc: Allow non-sleeping GPIO cd

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAE=gft52Yvtqy_i4eXoQs6XV=mrzahoSPxRO=3jiLNKL=pNP1A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 May 2018 12:21:44 -0700
From:   Evan Green <evgreen@...omium.org>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     adrian.hunter@...el.com, linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmc: Allow non-sleeping GPIO cd

On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 5:08 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:

> First, I thought I preferred this option, as it becomes clear of what
> goes on. However I then realize, that it may not be worth it, because
> in the end I guess the caller (sdhci), will not be able to deal with
> error codes. For example, what would it do if it receives  a -ENOTSUPP
> from mmc_gpio_get_cd_nosleep()?


Uffe,
Yeah, that would end up looking more like my original RFC patch, where we
just kind of assume the card is there (and therefore ignore the quirk) if
we're not in a preemptible state. Sounds like I should make another spin
this way, at least for consideration.

Andy,
Thanks for the review. I will incorporate your feedback into the next spin.
-Evan