linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] soc: qcom: pmic_glink: Actually communicate with remote goes down

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: <ZsRAnWgsoSHmrFE5@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2024 09:07:09 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Bjorn Andersson <quic_bjorande@...cinc.com>
Cc: Sebastian Reichel <sre@...nel.org>,
	Bjorn Andersson <andersson@...nel.org>,
	Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>,
	Heikki Krogerus <heikki.krogerus@...ux.intel.com>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	Neil Armstrong <neil.armstrong@...aro.org>,
	Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>,
	Chris Lew <quic_clew@...cinc.com>,
	Dmitry Baryshkov <dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org>,
	Stephen Boyd <swboyd@...omium.org>,
	Amit Pundir <amit.pundir@...aro.org>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] soc: qcom: pmic_glink: Actually communicate with
 remote goes down

On Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 01:07:47PM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
> When the pmic_glink state is UP and we either receive a protection-
> domain (PD) notification indicating that the PD is going down, or that
> the whole remoteproc is going down, it's expected that the pmic_glink
> client instances are notified that their function has gone DOWN.
> 
> This is not what the code does, which results in the client state either
> not updating, or being wrong in many cases. So let's fix the conditions.

> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ static void pmic_glink_state_notify_clients(struct pmic_glink *pg)
>  		if (pg->pdr_state == SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_UP && pg->ept)
>  			new_state = SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_UP;
>  	} else {
> -		if (pg->pdr_state == SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_UP && pg->ept)
> +		if (pg->pdr_state == SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_DOWN || !pg->ept)
>  			new_state = SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_DOWN;
>  	}

I guess you could drop the outer conditional

	if (pg->client_state != SERVREG_SERVICE_STATE_UP) {

	} else {

	}

here to make this a bit more readable, but that's for a separate patch.

Reviewed-by: Johan Hovold <johan+linaro@...nel.org>

Johan