linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 01/17] pinctrl: intel: Provide Intel pin control wide PM ops structure

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, 30 Oct 2023 21:56:14 +0200
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To:     Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com>
Cc:     Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Paul Cercueil <paul@...pouillou.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/17] pinctrl: intel: Provide Intel pin control wide
 PM ops structure

On Mon, Oct 30, 2023 at 07:43:50PM +0000, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Oct 2023 19:41:12 +0000
> Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@...wei.com> wrote:

...

> Actually looking at usecase, why isn't the absence of an EXPORT in
> the !CONFIG_PM_SLEEP path not a problem for bisection of this series given
> you haven't yet protected the users?

I'm not sure I got the issue you are trying to point out.
Between first and last patches the main driver exports two things: the PM ops
functions, which are _always_ been exported and PM ops structure, which is
exported only when CONFIG_PM_SLEEP=y. Every converted user has pm_sleep_ptr()
guard added so it shouldn't be a problem. What exactly did I miss?

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko