linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: tegra: Better handle case where CPU0 is busy for a long time

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]

Message-ID: <20200427110033.GC3464906@ulmo>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 13:00:33 +0200
From:   Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
To:     Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
Cc:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
        Manikanta Maddireddy <mmaddireddy@...dia.com>,
        Vidya Sagar <vidyas@...dia.com>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] i2c: tegra: Better handle case where CPU0 is busy
 for a long time

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 12:52:10PM +0300, Dmitry Osipenko wrote:
> 27.04.2020 10:48, Thierry Reding пишет:
> ...
> >> Maybe but all these other problems appear to have existed for sometime
> >> now. We need to fix all, but for the moment we need to figure out what's
> >> best for v5.7.
> > 
> > To me it doesn't sound like we have a good handle on what exactly is
> > going on here and we're mostly just poking around.
> > 
> > And even if things weren't working quite properly before, it sounds to
> > me like this patch actually made things worse.
> 
> There is a plenty of time to work on the proper fix now. To me it sounds
> like you're giving up on fixing the root of the problem, sorry.

We're at -rc3 now and I haven't seen any promising progress in the last
week. All the while suspend/resume is now broken on at least one board
and that may end up hiding any other issues that could creep in in the
meantime.

Furthermore we seem to have a preexisting issue that may very well
interfere with this patch, so I think the cautious thing is to revert
for now and then fix the original issue first. We can always come back
to this once everything is back to normal.

Also, people are now looking at backporting this to v5.6. Unless we
revert this from v5.7 it may get picked up for backports to other
kernels and then I have to notify stable kernel maintainers that they
shouldn't and they have to back things out again. That's going to cause
a lot of wasted time for a lot of people.

So, sorry, I disagree. I don't think we have "plenty of time".

Thierry

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)