linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] driver core: Break infinite loop when deferred probe can't be satisfied

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:   Tue, 24 Mar 2020 17:47:01 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        Felipe Balbi <balbi@...nel.org>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Peter Ujfalusi <peter.ujfalusi@...com>,
        Ferry Toth <fntoth@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] driver core: Break infinite loop when deferred
 probe can't be satisfied

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 04:36:56PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>  On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 2:39 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 01:52:00PM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> > > On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 1:20 PM Andy Shevchenko
> > > <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

...

> > > > +               atomic_dec(&probe_okay);
> > >
> > > Why is this needed?
> >
> > Under successful probe the following is comprehended. When probe of the driver
> > happens it may be discarded (as in above case) as it was initiated by another
> > driver which got deferred.
> >
> > We also discussed this with Peter [1] during his review.
> >
> > [1]: https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/3/12/347
> 
> OK, but I would add a comment explaining that to the code.
> 
> Also it would be good to explain why probe_okay cannot go below zero
> here in the changelog.

Will do, thank you for review!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko