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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 16:22:40 -0700 From: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "open list:OPEN FIRMWARE AND FLATTENED DEVICE TREE BINDINGS" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>, ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>, Ji Luo <ji.luo@....com>, Linux-Renesas <linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>, Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 4/4] of: platform: Batch fwnode parsing when adding all top level devices On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 8:49 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote: > > Hi Saravana, > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 4:33 AM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:07 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote: > > > I think instead of deferred_probe_work_func() moving the device to the > > > end of the dpm_list, I think the device probing successfully is what > > > should move it to the end of the dpm_list. That way, the dpm_list is > > > actually ordered by when the devices become functional and not the > > > random order in DT or random probe order which can get pretty > > > convoluted with multiple deferred probes. This feels right and will > > > make suspend/resume more robust against DT ordering -- but I'm not > > > sure what other wide ranging impact this has for other platforms. > > > > If you want to play around with a potential fix to test my hypothesis, > > I think it's just adding this one line to driver_bound(): > > ============ > > klist_add_tail(&dev->p->knode_driver, &dev->driver->p->klist_devices); > > device_links_driver_bound(dev); > > +device_pm_move_to_tail(dev); > > > > device_pm_check_callbacks(dev); > > ============ > > Thanks, that seems to fix the issue for me, on both affected systems! > Note that this has quite some impact on the order devices are suspended, > but this seems harmless. > > Will try on more systems later... Thanks for testing. Maybe I should just send that change as a patch and see what Greg/Rafael have to say to that. It's a general fix anyway. So, might as well send it out. -Saravana
Powered by blists - more mailing lists