linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm

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: <d151c91c-cb65-2830-2453-a02057137400@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 23 Sep 2021 22:32:39 +0200
From:   Ferry Toth <fntoth@...il.com>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux ACPI <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] PCI: ACPI: PM: Do not use pci_platform_pm_ops for
 ACPI

Hi

Op 23-09-2021 om 15:51 schreef Ferry Toth:
> Repost (with formatting removed, sorry for the noise)
> Op 23-09-2021 om 13:30 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki:
>> On Wed, Sep 22, 2021 at 11:31 PM Ferry Toth<fntoth@...il.com>  wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>> Op 20-09-2021 om 21:17 schreef Rafael J. Wysocki:
>>>> From: Rafael J. Wysocki<rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>>>>
>>>> Using struct pci_platform_pm_ops for ACPI adds unnecessary
>>>> indirection to the interactions between the PCI core and ACPI PM,
>>>> which is also subject to retpolines.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, it is not particularly clear from the current code that,
>>>> as far as PCI PM is concerned, "platform" really means just ACPI
>>>> except for the special casess when Intel MID PCI PM is used or when
>>>> ACPI support is disabled (through the kernel config or command line,
>>>> or because there are no usable ACPI tables on the system).
>>>>
>>>> To address the above, rework the PCI PM code to invoke ACPI PM
>>>> functions directly as needed and drop the acpi_pci_platform_pm
>>>> object that is not necessary any more.
>>>>
>>>> Accordingly, update some of the ACPI PM functions in question to do
>>>> extra checks in case the ACPI support is disabled (which previously
>>>> was taken care of by avoiding to set the pci_platform_ops pointer
>>>> in those cases).
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Rafael J. Wysocki<rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> v1 -> v2:
>>>>       * Rebase on top of the new [1/7] and move dropping struct
>>>>         pci_platform_pm_ops to a separate patch.
>>> I wanted to test this series on 5.15-rc2 but this patch 2/7 doesn't
>>> apply (after 1/7 applied). Should I apply this on another tree?
>> This is on top of
>> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-acpi/patch/2793105.e9J7NaK4W3@kreacher/ 
>>
>> which is not yet in any tree.
>>
>> Sorry for the confusion.
> No problem at all. If I can I will try to report back tonight. Else, 
> will be delayed 2 due to a short break.

With those 3 extra patches followed by 7 from this series it builds. But 
on boot I get:
dwc3 dwc3.0.auto: this is not a DesignWare USB3 DRD Core
Then after this it reboots. Nothing in the logs. Nothing else on 
console, I guess something goes wrong early.

I tried both in host / device mode - no change.

Normally in host mode I have:
usb usb1: New USB device found, idVendor=1d6b, idProduct=0002, 
bcdDevice= 5.14
Only ref to dwc3 is:
tusb1210 dwc3.0.auto.ulpi: using ACPI for GPIO lookup / using lookup 
tables for GPIO lookup / No GPIO consumer cs found