linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] reset: tegra-bpmp: Revert Handle errors in BPMP response

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: <984f6fd2-8d06-11b2-4e8f-b9db924a6519@nvidia.com>
Date:   Mon, 15 Nov 2021 18:09:48 +0000
From:   Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
To:     Mikko Perttunen <cyndis@...si.fi>,
        Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@...gutronix.de>,
        Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>
Cc:     Mikko Perttunen <mperttunen@...dia.com>,
        linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] reset: tegra-bpmp: Revert Handle errors in BPMP response


On 15/11/2021 17:21, Mikko Perttunen wrote:
> On 11/12/21 1:27 PM, Jon Hunter wrote:
>> Commit c045ceb5a145 ("reset: tegra-bpmp: Handle errors in BPMP
>> response") fixed an issue in the Tegra BPMP error handling but has
>> exposed an issue in the Tegra194 HDA driver and now resetting the
>> Tegra194 HDA controller is failing. For now revert the commit
>> c045ceb5a145 ("reset: tegra-bpmp: Handle errors in BPMP response")
>> while a fix for the Tegra HDA driver is created.
>>
>> Fixes: c045ceb5a145 ("reset: tegra-bpmp: Handle errors in BPMP response")
>> Signed-off-by: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/reset/tegra/reset-bpmp.c | 9 +--------
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/reset/tegra/reset-bpmp.c 
>> b/drivers/reset/tegra/reset-bpmp.c
>> index 4c5bba52b105..24d3395964cc 100644
>> --- a/drivers/reset/tegra/reset-bpmp.c
>> +++ b/drivers/reset/tegra/reset-bpmp.c
>> @@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ static int tegra_bpmp_reset_common(struct 
>> reset_controller_dev *rstc,
>>       struct tegra_bpmp *bpmp = to_tegra_bpmp(rstc);
>>       struct mrq_reset_request request;
>>       struct tegra_bpmp_message msg;
>> -    int err;
>>       memset(&request, 0, sizeof(request));
>>       request.cmd = command;
>> @@ -31,13 +30,7 @@ static int tegra_bpmp_reset_common(struct 
>> reset_controller_dev *rstc,
>>       msg.tx.data = &request;
>>       msg.tx.size = sizeof(request);
>> -    err = tegra_bpmp_transfer(bpmp, &msg);
>> -    if (err)
>> -        return err;
>> -    if (msg.rx.ret)
>> -        return -EINVAL;
>> -
>> -    return 0;
>> +    return tegra_bpmp_transfer(bpmp, &msg);
>>   }
>>   static int tegra_bpmp_reset_module(struct reset_controller_dev *rstc,
>>
> 
> Is there some reason the subject and commit message does not follow 
> normal revert convention (as done by 'git revert')?


Some maintainers prefer that the patch is not titled "Revert ..." and 
want the patch subject to follow the normal sub-system prefix. If you 
search through the patches for 'revert' in the subject you will see a 
mixture. I prefer this approach.

Jon

-- 
nvpublic