linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] hwmon: chipcap2: disable sensor if request ready irq fails

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: <eefbeda1-8c09-4b57-83dc-30be9966de2b@roeck-us.net>
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 13:08:59 -0700
From: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
To: Javier Carrasco <javier.carrasco.cruz@...il.com>,
 Jean Delvare <jdelvare@...e.com>
Cc: linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] hwmon: chipcap2: disable sensor if request ready irq
 fails

On 8/12/24 12:59, Javier Carrasco wrote:
> On 12/08/2024 18:49, Guenter Roeck wrote:
>> On 8/12/24 08:43, Javier Carrasco wrote:
>>> This check is carried out after getting the regulator, and the device
>>> can be disabled if an error occurs.
>>>
>>
>> I do not see a possible path for a call to cc2_enable() at this point,
>> meaning the regulator won't ever be enabled. Please provide a better
>> explanation why this patch would be necessary.
>>
>> Guenter
>>
> 
> Hi Guenter,
> 
> this patch enforces the state where the dedicated regulator is disabled,
> no matter what the history of the regulator was. If a previous
> regulator_disable() failed, it would still be desirable that the
> regulator gets disabled the next time the driver is probed (i.e. a new
> attempt to disable it on failure).
> cc2_disable() checks first if the regulator is enabled to avoid any
> imbalance.
> 

That is very theoretic. Sorry, I am not going to accept this patch.

Guenter