linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] driver core: Rework logic in __driver_deferred_probe_check_state to allow EPROBE

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CALAqxLWtYfwCzDRVecWF8yRQSKQZh-N2g0SifageUaG0QhBGJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Feb 2020 16:19:05 -0800
From:   John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Todd Kjos <tkjos@...gle.com>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        "linux-pm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] driver core: Rework logic in __driver_deferred_probe_check_state
 to allow EPROBE_DEFER to be returned for longer

On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 4:06 PM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, February 19, 2020, John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org> wrote:
>> diff --git a/drivers/base/dd.c b/drivers/base/dd.c
>> index b25bcab2a26b..9d916a7b56a6 100644
>> --- a/drivers/base/dd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/base/dd.c
>> @@ -237,13 +237,12 @@ __setup("deferred_probe_timeout=", deferred_probe_timeout_setup);
>>
>>  static int __driver_deferred_probe_check_state(struct device *dev)
>>  {
>> -       if (!initcalls_done)
>> -               return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
>
> Why to touch this? Can't you simple add a new condition here 'if (deferred_probe_timeout > 0)'... ?

I think that might work. I'll give it a spin later tonight and double check it.

The main thing I wanted to do is fix the logic hole in the current
code where after initcalls_done=true but before deferred_probe_timeout
has expired we just fall through and return 0, which results in an
ENODEV being returned from the calling function.

thanks
-john