linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4] hwmon: Add support for Amphenol ChipCap 2

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: <a5b63eb4-4168-425e-a235-15cc7a6f2df3@linaro.org>
Date:   Thu, 9 Nov 2023 09:40:28 +0100
From:   Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski@...aro.org>
To:     Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>,
        Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>,
        Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
        Conor Dooley <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
        Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
        Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
        Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Cc:     Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] hwmon: Add support for Amphenol ChipCap 2

On 08/11/2023 17:35, Javier Carrasco wrote:
>>> +
>>> +	data->regulator = devm_regulator_get_optional(dev, "vdd");
>>> +	if (!IS_ERR(data->regulator)) {
>>> +		ret = cc2_retrive_alarm_config(data);
>>> +		if (ret)
>>> +			goto cleanup;
>>> +	} else {
>>> +		/* No access to EEPROM without regulator: no alarm control */
>>
>> Test your code with deferred probe. Are you sure you handle it
>> correctly? To me, it looks like you handle deferred probe the same as
>> any error.
>>
> The -EPROBE_DEFER is propagated to the probe function and it is the
> returned value. I clarified the error path in v2 so no error messages

Really?

I see:
if (!IS_ERR(data->regulator)) {
	// so you do not go here
} else {
	goto dev_register;
}
dev_register is not error path. So how do you return EPROBE_DEFER?

Which line of code does it?

> are displayed in that case, going directly to the dev_err_probe in the
> probe cleanup.
> When the EPROBE_DEFER error is returned, the probe function is deferred
> and called again later on, which is the desired behavior.
> 


Best regards,
Krzysztof