linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] mfd: intel_soc_pmic: Fix an error handling path in intel_soc_pmic_i2c

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:34:47 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
To:     Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Lee Jones <lee@...nel.org>, Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
        Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/10] mfd: intel_soc_pmic: Fix an error handling path
 in intel_soc_pmic_i2c_probe()

On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 12:53 PM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> On 8/1/22 12:38, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 11:52 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> >> On 8/1/22 11:29, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 11:14 AM Andy Shevchenko
> >>> <andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Mon, Aug 1, 2022 at 10:43 AM Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com> wrote:
> >>>>> On 7/31/22 22:12, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >
> > ...
> >
> >>>>> Note alternatively we could just move the pwm_add_table() to just before the "return 0",
> >>>>> there is no strict ordering between adding the mfd devices and the pwm_add_table()
> >>>>> (the pwm device only becomes available after the pwm-driver has bound to the mfd
> >>>>> instantiated platform device which happens later).
> >>>
> >>> Just to be sure... How is it guaranteed that that happens later?
> >>
> >> Ah you are right, it could happen immediately if the driver is builtin and
> >> has already registered (if the PWM driver is a module, as it is on Fedora,
> >> then the driver will only bind once the module is loaded).
> >>
> >> Regardless there are no ordering guarantees between the probe() function of
> >> intel_soc_pmic and the consumer of the PWM device, so the consumer must
> >> be prepared to deal with the lookup not being present yet when its probe()
> >> function runs (*).
> >
> > Would be nice to have, but isn't it the issue with all lookup tables
> > so far, e.g. consumers of GPIO ones are also affected the very same
> > way?
> >
> >> *) ATM this is actually an unsolved problem and this works only because the PMIC
> >> drivers are builtin and i915, which consumes the PWM for backlight control
> >> is a module. Swapping the order does not impact this.
> >
> > Even so, I think we can't change order right now because the issue is
> > much broader.
>
> Ok, lets go with the original v2 1/10 patch then. In that case, you
> may add my:

Will do.

> Reviewed-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
>
> to the original v2 1/10 patch.

Thanks!

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko