linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: gdsc: Bump parent usage count when GDSC is found enabled

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: <20220608205411.2B0B0C34116@smtp.kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 08 Jun 2022 13:54:09 -0700
From:   Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: gdsc: Bump parent usage count when GDSC is found enabled

Quoting Bjorn Andersson (2022-06-06 14:21:12)
> When a GDSC is found to be enabled at boot the pm_runtime state will
> be unbalanced as the GDSC is later turned off. Fix this by increasing
> the usage counter on the power-domain, in line with how we handled the
> regulator state.
> 
> Fixes: 1b771839de05 ("clk: qcom: gdsc: enable optional power domain support")

Is it fixing a regression to the point that I need to merge this on
-fixes? The commit text talks about fixing it but I don't understand the
urgency, i.e. was it discovered recently and this fixes display on some
board or something like that?

> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
> ---
>  drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c
> index 44520efc6c72..a1fa7c4cff60 100644
> --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c
> +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/gdsc.c
> @@ -420,6 +420,9 @@ static int gdsc_init(struct gdsc *sc)
>                                 return ret;
>                 }
>  
> +               /* ...and the power-domain */
> +               gdsc_pm_runtime_get(sc);

Shouldn't we check for error and bail out if it fails?