linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Bring back driver_deferred_probe_check

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: <CAD=FV=W1P=4vzyTYQ+yVC=fH-7i=hjCAk7FV8jcGcGY+xa62pA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Aug 2022 16:46:46 -0700
From:   Doug Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>
To:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc:     Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        Kevin Hilman <khilman@...nel.org>,
        Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
        Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>, Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>,
        kernel-team@...roid.com, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PM <linux-pm@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 0/3] Bring back driver_deferred_probe_check_state() for now

Hi,

On Thu, Jul 28, 2022 at 12:29 AM Greg Kroah-Hartman
<gregkh@...uxfoundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 11:50:08AM -0700, Saravana Kannan wrote:
> > More fixes/changes are needed before driver_deferred_probe_check_state()
> > can be deleted. So, bring it back for now.
> >
> > Greg,
> >
> > Can we get this into 5.19? If not, it might not be worth picking up this
> > series. I could just do the other/more fixes in time for 5.20.
>
> Wow, no, it is _WAY_ too late for 5.19 to make a change like this,
> sorry.
>
> What is so broken that we need to revert these now?  I could do so for
> 5.20-rc1, and then backport to 5.19.y if that release is really broken,
> but this feels odd so late in the cycle.

I spent a bunch of time bisecting mainline today on my
sc7180-trogdor-lazor board. When building the top of Linus's tree
today the display doesn't come up. I can make it come up by turning
fw_devlink off (after fixing a regulator bug that I just posted a fix
for).

I found that the first bad commit was commit 5a46079a9645 ("PM:
domains: Delete usage of driver_deferred_probe_check_state()")

...but only when applied to mainline. When I cherry-pick that back to
v5.19-rc1 (and pick another bugfix needed to boot my board against
v5.19-rc1) then it works OK. After yet more bisecting, I found that on
trogdor there's a bad interaction with the commit e511a760 ("arm64:
dts: qcom: sm7180: remove assigned-clock-rate property for mdp clk").
That commit is perfectly legit but I guess it somehow changed how
fw_devlink was interpreting things?

Sure enough, picking this revert series fixes things on Linus's tree.
Any chance we can still get the revert in for v5.20-rc1? ;-)


-Doug