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  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:   Thu, 21 May 2020 17:22:05 +0200
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com>
Cc:     dinghao.liu@....edu.cn, devel@...verdev.osuosl.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jonathan Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>,
        linux-tegra <linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org>,
        Dmitry Osipenko <digetx@...il.com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        linux-media@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH] media: staging: tegra-vde: fix runtime pm imbalance
 on error

On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:15 AM Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 11:42:55AM +0800, dinghao.liu@....edu.cn wrote:
> > Hi, Dan,
> >
> > I agree the best solution is to fix __pm_runtime_resume(). But there are also
> > many cases that assume pm_runtime_get_sync() will change PM usage
> > counter on error. According to my static analysis results, the number of these
> > "right" cases are larger. Adjusting __pm_runtime_resume() directly will introduce
> > more new bugs. Therefore I think we should resolve the "bug" cases individually.
> >
>
> That's why I was saying that we may need to introduce a new replacement
> function for pm_runtime_get_sync() that works as expected.
>
> There is no reason why we have to live with the old behavior.

What exactly do you mean by "the old behavior"?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists