linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] driver: core: add dedicated workqueue for devlink removal

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: <31f7c989e9ee1eae49976466543f7192865775ff.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Feb 2024 15:32:04 +0100
From: Nuno Sá <noname.nuno@...il.com>
To: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>, nuno.sa@...log.com
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, "Rafael J. Wysocki"
 <rafael@...nel.org>, Frank Rowand <frowand.list@...il.com>, Rob Herring
 <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Daniel Scally <djrscally@...il.com>, Heikki Krogerus
 <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>, Sakari Ailus
 <sakari.ailus@...ux.intel.com>,  Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
 linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org, 
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] driver: core: add dedicated workqueue for
 devlink removal

On Mon, 2024-02-05 at 14:35 +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 05, 2024 at 01:09:32PM +0100, Nuno Sa via B4 Relay wrote:
> > From: Nuno Sa <nuno.sa@...log.com>
> > 
> > Let's use a dedicated queue for devlinks since releasing a link happens
> > asynchronously but some code paths, like DT overlays, have some
> > expectations regarding the of_node when being removed (the refcount must
> > be 1). Given how devlinks are released that cannot be assured. Hence, add a
> > dedicated queue so that it's easy to sync against devlinks removal.
> > 
> > While at it, make sure to explicitly include <linux/workqueue.h>.
> 
> ...
> 
> > +++ b/include/linux/fwnode.h
> > @@ -213,5 +213,6 @@ extern bool fw_devlink_is_strict(void);
> >  int fwnode_link_add(struct fwnode_handle *con, struct fwnode_handle *sup);
> >  void fwnode_links_purge(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode);
> >  void fw_devlink_purge_absent_suppliers(struct fwnode_handle *fwnode);
> > +void fwnode_links_flush_queue(void);
> 
> I am not sure if you have seen my comment against v1.
> 

I did received it like 30min ago...

> I find the namespace a bit messy for devlinks. And to me seems the best place
> for this line is to be before fwnode_links_purge().
> 

TBH, I'm not really keen on sending a v3 just for that (unless I'm asked otherwise).
But If I have (still missing DT guys feedback), I'll do as you suggested.

- Nuno Sá