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:   Mon, 18 Nov 2019 09:12:24 +0100
From:   patrick.rudolph@...ements.com
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Allison Randal <allison@...utok.net>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Alexios Zavras <alexios.zavras@...el.com>,
        Arthur Heymans <arthur@...ymans.xyz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] firmware: google: Release devices before
 unregistering the bus

On Sat, 2019-11-16 at 14:38 +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 02:48:37PM +0100, 
> patrick.rudolph@...ements.com wrote:
> > From: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@...ements.com>
> > 
> > Fix a bug where the kernel module can't be loaded after it has been
> > unloaded as the devices are still present and conflicting with the
> > to be created coreboot devices.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Patrick Rudolph <patrick.rudolph@...ements.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/firmware/google/coreboot_table.c | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/google/coreboot_table.c
> > b/drivers/firmware/google/coreboot_table.c
> > index 8d132e4f008a..88c6545bebf4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/google/coreboot_table.c
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/google/coreboot_table.c
> > @@ -163,8 +163,14 @@ static int coreboot_table_probe(struct
> > platform_device *pdev)
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static int __cb_dev_unregister(struct device *dev, void *dummy)
> > +{
> > +	device_unregister(dev);
> 
> Did you build this patch???
> 
> Did it work when you tested it?  How?
> 
It builds without a warning and is working.

It looks like there's no -Werror=return-type in the kernel's Makefile,
which is kind of odd as this is kind of undefined behaviour in C...

Will fix.

> Please fix up,
> 
> greg k-h

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ