linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/1] serial: core: Start managing serial controllers to enable runtime PM

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:   Mon, 12 Dec 2022 14:49:48 +0200 (EET)
From:   Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com>
cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>,
        Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
        Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@...com>,
        linux-serial <linux-serial@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v4 1/1] serial: core: Start managing serial controllers
 to enable runtime PM

On Mon, 12 Dec 2022, Tony Lindgren wrote:

> Hi Ilpo,
> 
> * Tony Lindgren <tony@...mide.com> [221208 11:13]:
> > * Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com> [221208 10:48]:
> > > With the other patch on top of this, yes, I did see uninitialized 
> > > port->port_dev already in serial_core_add_one_port()->uart_configure_port().
> > > While that could be solved by removing the pm_runtime_*() calls from 
> > > there, I think it's a generic problem because after 
> > > serial_core_add_one_port() the port can have anything happening on it, no?
> > 
> > OK. Sounds like it should get sorted out by moving the call to
> > serial_core_add_one_port() to happen after the devices are created.
> 
> Can you give a try with the patch below and see if it works for you?

This one worked, yes.

-- 
 i.