linux-kernel - Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/3] clk: ingenic: Mark critical clocks in Ingenic SoCs

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]

Date:   Thu, 21 Apr 2022 19:33:57 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@...il.com>,
        mturquette@...libre.com, paul@...pouillou.net,
        paulburton@...nel.org, tsbogend@...ha.franken.de
Cc:     linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH 2/3] clk: ingenic: Mark critical clocks in Ingenic SoCs

Quoting Aidan MacDonald (2022-04-11 03:14:40)
> Consider the CPU, L2 cache, and memory as critical to ensure they
> are not disabled.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Aidan MacDonald <aidanmacdonald.0x0@...il.com>
> Reviewed-by: Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
> ---

General comment, please add a comment around CLK_IS_CRITICAL usage if it
isn't very clear why such a clk shouldn't be turned off. Second, is
there any point in describing these clks in the kernel and using memory
to do that if they're just going to always be on? Wouldn't a dummy clk
returned from clk_get() work just as well if anything is grabbing a
reference with clk_get()?