linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add documentation on meaning of -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-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 27 Mar 2020 11:10:43 -0700
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To:     Grant Likely <grant.likely@....com>
Cc:     Linux Doc Mailing List <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, nd@....com,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add documentation on meaning of -EPROBE_DEFER

On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 10:01 AM Grant Likely <grant.likely@....com> wrote:
>
> Add a bit of documentation on what it means when a driver .probe() hook
> returns the -EPROBE_DEFER error code, including the limitation that
> -EPROBE_DEFER should be returned as early as possible, before the driver
> starts to register child devices.
>
> Also: minor markup fixes in the same file
>
> Signed-off-by: Grant Likely <grant.likely@....com>
> Cc: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
> Cc: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  .../driver-api/driver-model/driver.rst        | 32 ++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/driver.rst b/Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/driver.rst
> index baa6a85c8287..63057d9bc8a6 100644
> --- a/Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/driver.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/driver.rst
> @@ -4,7 +4,6 @@ Device Drivers
>
>  See the kerneldoc for the struct device_driver.
>
> -
>  Allocation
>  ~~~~~~~~~~
>
> @@ -167,9 +166,26 @@ the driver to that device.
>
>  A driver's probe() may return a negative errno value to indicate that
>  the driver did not bind to this device, in which case it should have
> -released all resources it allocated::
> +released all resources it allocated.
> +
> +Optionally, probe() may return -EPROBE_DEFER if the driver depends on
> +resources that are not yet available (e.g., supplied by a driver that
> +hasn't initialized yet).  The driver core will put the device onto the
> +deferred probe list and will try to call it again later. If a driver
> +must defer, it should return -EPROBE_DEFER as early as possible to
> +reduce the amount of time spent on setup work that will need to be
> +unwound and reexecuted at a later time.
> +
> +.. warning::
> +      -EPROBE_DEFER must not be returned if probe() has already created
> +      child devices, even if those child devices are removed again
> +      in a cleanup path. If -EPROBE_DEFER is returned after a child
> +      device has been registered, it may result in an infinite loop of
> +      .probe() calls to the same driver.

The infinite loop is a current implementation behavior. Not an
intentional choice. So, maybe we can say the behavior is undefined
instead?

-Saravana