linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/7] clk: at91: sckc: improve error path

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:   Wed, 26 Jun 2019 11:53:59 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com
Cc:     mturquette@...libre.com, Nicolas.Ferre@...rochip.com,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, claudiu.beznea@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] clk: at91: sckc: improve error path

Quoting Alexandre Belloni (2019-06-21 02:33:02)
> On 20/06/2019 10:30:42+0000, Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On 18.06.2019 12:55, Alexandre Belloni wrote:
> > > On 13/06/2019 15:37:06+0000, Claudiu.Beznea@...rochip.com wrote:
> > >> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...rochip.com>
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> This series tries to improve error path for slow clock registrations
> > >> by adding functions to free resources and using them on failures.
> > >>
> > > 
> > > Does the platform even boot when the slow clock is not available? 
> > > 
> > > The TCB clocksource would fail at:
> > > 
> > >         tc.slow_clk = of_clk_get_by_name(node->parent, "slow_clk");
> > >         if (IS_ERR(tc.slow_clk))
> > >                 return PTR_ERR(tc.slow_clk);
> > > 
> > 
> > In case of using TC as clocksource, yes, the platform wouldn't boot if slow
> > clock is not available, because, anyway the TC needs it. PIT may work
> > without it (if slow clock is not used to drive the PIT).
> > 
> > For sure there are other IPs (which may be or are driven by slow clock)
> > which may not work if slow clock is driven them.
> > 
> > Anyway, please let me know if you feel this series has no meaning.
> > 
> 
> Well, I'm not sure it is worth it but at the same time, it is not adding
> many lines and you already developed it...
> 

Is that a Reviewed-by or a Rejected-by tag?