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]
Date:   Fri, 28 Aug 2020 08:06:03 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@...eaurora.org>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
        Andy Gross <agross@...nel.org>,
        Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@...aro.org>,
        Rafael Wysocki <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>, Nishanth Menon <nm@...com>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-mmc@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 4/8] mmc: sdhci-msm: Unconditionally call dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table()

Hi,

On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 1:44 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 28 Aug 2020 at 08:08, Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org> wrote:
> >
> > dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table() doesn't report any errors when it fails to
> > find the OPP table with error -ENODEV (i.e. OPP table not present for
> > the device). And we can call dev_pm_opp_of_remove_table()
> > unconditionally here.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>
>
> Replaced v1 with v2 on my next branch, thanks!

Actually, I don't see it on there yet, but at least the old broken v1
isn't there anymore.  ;-)

I picked v2 and tried it on my sc7180-based device (which does have
OPP tables).  It worked fine.  Thus:

Tested-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>

I looked at the code and it looks right to me.  Thus:

Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>


> Just to be sure, this patch doesn't depend on any changes for the opp
> core that are queued for v5.10?

Running atop mmc-next, I see the check for -ENODEV, so I'm gonna
assume that the required change is there.

$ git grep -A10 'void _dev_pm_opp_find_and_remove_table' -- drivers/opp/core.c
drivers/opp/core.c:void _dev_pm_opp_find_and_remove_table(struct device *dev)
drivers/opp/core.c-{
drivers/opp/core.c-     struct opp_table *opp_table;
drivers/opp/core.c-
drivers/opp/core.c-     /* Check for existing table for 'dev' */
drivers/opp/core.c-     opp_table = _find_opp_table(dev);
drivers/opp/core.c-     if (IS_ERR(opp_table)) {
drivers/opp/core.c-             int error = PTR_ERR(opp_table);
drivers/opp/core.c-
drivers/opp/core.c-             if (error != -ENODEV)
drivers/opp/core.c-                     WARN(1, "%s: opp_table: %d\n",

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ