linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 11/22] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMIv3.1 extended names protocols support

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:   Wed, 15 Jun 2022 09:10:03 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        sudeep.holla@....com, james.quinlan@...adcom.com,
        Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com, etienne.carriere@...aro.org,
        vincent.guittot@...aro.org, souvik.chakravarty@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 11/22] firmware: arm_scmi: Add SCMIv3.1 extended names
 protocols support

On 6/15/22 02:40, Cristian Marussi wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 09:18:03AM +0100, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 05:45:11AM +0200, Florian Fainelli wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/30/2022 5:05 PM, Cristian Marussi wrote:
>>>> Using the common protocol helper implementation add support for all new
>>>> SCMIv3.1 extended names commands related to all protocols with the
>>>> exception of SENSOR_AXIS_GET_NAME.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Cristian Marussi <cristian.marussi@....com>
>>>
>>> This causes the following splat on a platform where regulators fail to
>>> initialize:
>>>
>>
>> Hi Florian,
>>
>> thanks for the report.
>>
>> It seems a memory error while allocating so it was not meant to be
>> solved by the fixes, anyway, I've never seen this splat in my testing
>> and at first sight I cannot see anything wrong in the devm_k* calls
>> inside scmi_voltage_protocol_init...is there any particular config in
>> your setup ?
>>
>> Moreover, the WARNING line 5402 seems to match v5.19-rc1 and it has
>> slightly changed with -rc-1, so I'll try rebasing on that at first and
>> see if I can reproduce the issue locally.
>>
> 
> I just re-tested the series rebased on v519-rc1 plus fixes and I cannot
> reproduce in my setup with a few (~9) good and bad voltage domains.
> 
> How many voltage domains are advertised by the platform in your setup ?

There are 11 voltage regulators on this platform, and of course, now 
that I am trying to reproduce the splat I reported I just cannot 
anymore... I will let you know if there is anything that needs to be 
done. Thanks for being responsive as usual!
-- 
Florian