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: <dc2de966-81d6-6ad5-0c51-16dd28ca4165@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 16:15:21 +0300
From:   Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        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

27.04.2020 13:38, Wolfram Sang пишет:
> 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.
> 
> From what I understood, there were (at least) two regressions reported.
> So, to me, it makes sense to revert the change, so for upstream users
> everything stays "the same". Of course, this does not mean it should
> stay like this forever and you guys can work on fixing the root causes.
> I'll happily apply them for this release when you are confident with the
> results.
> 

For now it's a single regression in the PCIe driver and it's actually
not a regression, but a PCIe driver bug that needs to be fixed. The I2C
part should be okay.

By reverting the I2C patch, we're back to the PCIe bug being papered
over and I don't like this. Let's just fix the PCIe driver and the
problem is gone.. it needs to be fixed anyways.