linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] driver core: Refactor sysfs and drv/bus remove hooks

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: <YhdK3NtkC0sgkNgO@kroah.com>
Date:   Thu, 24 Feb 2022 10:07:40 +0100
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] driver core: Refactor sysfs and drv/bus remove hooks

On Wed, Feb 23, 2022 at 04:52:57PM -0600, Rob Herring wrote:
> There are 3 copies of the same device sysfs cleanup and drv/bus remove()
> hooks used for probe failure, testing re-probing, and device unbinding.
> 
> Let's refactor the code to its own function.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
> ---
> Note that driver_sysfs_remove() remains a separate call because in
> __device_release_driver() it is called with a pm runtime get/put and
> before the unbind notifier. Browsing the history, it doesn't seem like
> there's any particular reason for this ordering. We also have other
> sysfs teardown done later. It would be more logical to do all the
> sysfs teardown at once. Thoughts?

I think it should be unified, so you can send a follow-on patch to do
that.

I'll go queue these changes up now, thanks for the cleanups!

greg k-h