linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 9/9] ASoC: cs35l41: Use devm_pm_runtime

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 5 Sep 2023 09:45:35 +0000
From:   Charles Keepax <ckeepax@...nsource.cirrus.com>
To:     Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>
CC:     James Schulman <james.schulman@...rus.com>,
        David Rhodes <david.rhodes@...rus.com>,
        Richard Fitzgerald <rf@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        "Liam Girdwood" <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        "Stefan Binding" <sbinding@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <patches@...nsource.cirrus.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel@...labora.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/9] ASoC: cs35l41: Use devm_pm_runtime_enable()

On Sun, Sep 03, 2023 at 12:06:21AM +0300, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> Simplify runtime PM during probe by converting pm_runtime_enable() to
> the managed version.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>
> ---
> @@ -1376,7 +1379,6 @@ void cs35l41_remove(struct cs35l41_private *cs35l41)
>  	cancel_work_sync(&cs35l41->mdsync_up_work);
>  
>  	pm_runtime_get_sync(cs35l41->dev);
> -	pm_runtime_disable(cs35l41->dev);
>  
>  	regmap_write(cs35l41->regmap, CS35L41_IRQ1_MASK1, 0xFFFFFFFF);
>  	if (cs35l41->hw_cfg.bst_type == CS35L41_SHD_BOOST_PASS ||

Are we sure this is safe? The remove handler appears to be
written to disable pm_runtime at the start presumably to stop the
resume/suspend handler running during the remove callback.
Whereas after this change the pm_runtime isn't disabled until
after the remove callback has run. Does this open a window were
we could get an erroneous pm_runtime suspend after the
pm_runtime_put_noidle?

Thanks,
Charles