linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] PM / core: Fix supplier device runtime PM usage counter imbalance

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: <CAJZ5v0gYpceS_zpmOqowu3_Pn2qVo=H4r__67qv-Ybyy-ijFZQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jun 2018 09:58:55 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PM / core: Fix supplier device runtime PM usage counter imbalance

On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 9:43 PM, Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> On 12 June 2018 at 14:44, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> wrote:

[cut]

>>
>> Is there any way to keep old behavior?
>
> I think the old behavior is sub-optimal. I am sure there are users
> that really don't want the driver core to runtime resume the supplier
> unconditionally.

I agree.

That said, the existing behavior has been there for quite a while and
the callers of device_link_add() that have grown a dependency on it
should be given a chance to change before it goes away.

> I would rather go and fix the few users of device_link_add(), to use
> DL_FLAG_RPM_ACTIVE, in cases when they need it.

Which BTW was the original idea. :-)

> Of course I am fine if we do these changes in a step by step basis as well.

OK, because that's what I'd prefer to do.