linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] of: platform: Make sure bus only devices get probed

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: <CAGETcx8dZe4+E04soQw1XT2C82VmaYW48=cBmYOes07qkeqiww@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 3 Sep 2021 12:08:23 -0700
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To:     Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
Cc:     Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>,
        Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        DTML <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] of: platform: Make sure bus only devices get probed

On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 12:06 PM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Saravana,
>
> On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:09 PM Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 7:29 AM Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, Sep 3, 2021 at 11:19 AM Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org> wrote:
> > > > On Fri, 3 Sept 2021 at 01:04, Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > > > fw_devlink could end up creating device links for bus only devices.
> > > > > However, bus only devices don't get probed and can block probe() or
> > > > > sync_state() [1] call backs of other devices. To avoid this, set up
> > > > > these devices to get probed by the simple-pm-bus.
> > > > >
> > > > > [1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAPDyKFo9Bxremkb1dDrr4OcXSpE0keVze94Cm=zrkOVxHHxBmQ@mail.gmail.com/
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> > > > > Tested-by: Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
> > > >
> > > > Again, this looks like a nice solution to the problem.
> > > >
> > > > One question though. The Kconfig SIMPLE_PM_BUS, should probably be
> > > > "default y" - or something along those lines to make sure fw_devlink
> > > > works as expected.
> > >
> > > I would love for SIMPLE_PM_BUS to go away, and all of its functionality
> > > to be usurped by the standard simple-bus handling.
> >
> > What if SIMPLE_PM_BUS *is* the standard simple-bus handling?
> > Insert "I'm the captain now" meme.
>
> No objections from my side.  In fact that's how I wanted it to be
> from the beginning, but the DT people wanted a separate compatible
> value (and a separate driver).  The only difference is the presence
> of pm_runtime_*() calls.
>
> > I think SIMPLE_PM_BUS config should just go away and we should compile
> > the driver in if CONFIG_OF is selected.
>
> I think there would be no need for a separate driver, if the standard
> simple-bus handling would take care of it.

I'm not sure about the history there. For now, I'm just extending this
driver to take care of simple-bus too.

-Saravana