linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v9 0/4] driver core: add probe error check helper

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: <20200730164845.GE5055@sirena.org.uk>
Date:   Thu, 30 Jul 2020 17:48:45 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andrzej Hajda <a.hajda@...sung.com>,
        Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@...l.net>,
        Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <b.zolnierkie@...sung.com>,
        Jonas Karlman <jonas@...boo.se>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DRM DRIVERS" <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@...libre.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>,
        Laurent Pinchart <Laurent.pinchart@...asonboard.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 0/4] driver core: add probe error check helper

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 09:18:30AM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:

> I believe it still has not been answered why this can't be pushed into
> resource providers (clock, regulators, gpio, interrupts, etc),
> especially for devm APIs where we know exactly what device we are
> requesting a resource for, so that individual drivers do not need to
> change anything.

The error messages are frequently in the caller rather than the
frameworks, it's often helpful for the comprehensibility of the error
messages especially in cases where things may be legitimately absent.

>                  We can mark the device as being probed so that probe
> deferral is only handled when we actually execute probe() (and for the
> bonus points scream loudly if someone tries to return -EPROBE_DEFER
> outside of probe path).

Is this a big issue?

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (489 bytes)