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: Fri, 27 Aug 2021 03:23:01 +0200 From: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> To: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>, Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>, Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>, Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Alvin Sipraga <ALSI@...g-olufsen.dk>, kernel-team@...roid.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] driver core: fw_devlink: Add support for FWNODE_FLAG_BROKEN_PARENT > Doesn't add much to the discussion. In the example I gave, the driver > already does synchronous probing. If the device can't probe > successfully because a supplier isn't ready, it doesn't matter if it's > a synchronous probe. The probe would still be deferred and we'll hit > the same issue. Even in the situation the commit [5] describes, if > parallelized probing is done and the PHY depended on something (say a > clock), you'd still end up not probing the PHY even if the driver is > present and the generic PHY would end up force probing it. genphy is meant to be used when there is no other driver available. It is a best effort, better than nothing, might work. And quite a few boards rely on it. However, it should not be used when there is a specific driver. So if the PHY device has been probed, and -EPROBE_DEFER was returned, we also need to return -EPROBE_DEFER here when deciding if genphy should be used. It should then all unwind and try again later. I don't know the device core, but it looks like dev->can_match tells us what we need to know. If true, we know there is a driver for this device. But i'm hesitant to make use of this outside of driver/base. Andrew
Powered by blists - more mailing lists