linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 00/18] USB/IP VHCI suspend fix and driver cleanup

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5b39ce10-9845-4429-95bb-18b03513cdaf@collabora.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 2025 12:14:15 +0300
From: Cristian Ciocaltea <cristian.ciocaltea@...labora.com>
To: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: Valentina Manea <valentina.manea.m@...il.com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Hongren Zheng <i@...ithal.me>,
 "Brian G. Merrell" <bgmerrell@...ell.com>, kernel@...labora.com,
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 00/18] USB/IP VHCI suspend fix and driver cleanup

On 7/28/25 12:41 PM, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 7/26/25 9:43 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> On Sat, Jul 26, 2025 at 01:08:02AM +0300, Cristian Ciocaltea wrote:
>>> The USB/IP Virtual Host Controller (VHCI) platform driver is expected to
>>> prevent entering system suspend when at least one remote device is
>>> attached to the virtual USB root hub.
>>>
>>> However, in some cases, the detection logic for active USB/IP
>>> connections doesn't seem to work reliably, e.g. when all devices
>>> attached to the virtual hub have been already suspended.  This will
>>> normally lead to a broken suspend state, with unrecoverable resume.
>>>
>>> The first patch of the series provides a workaround to ensure the
>>> virtually attached devices do not enter suspend.  Note this is currently
>>> limited to the client side (vhci_hcd) only, since the server side
>>> (usbip_host) doesn't implement system suspend prevention.
>>>
>>> Additionally, during the investigation I noticed and fixed a bunch of
>>> coding style issues, hence the subsequent patches contain all the
>>> changes needed to make checkpatch happy for the entire driver.
>>
>> You are doing two major things here, fixing suspend, and cleaning up
>> checkpatch issues.  Please make that two different patch sets as those
>> are not logical things to put together at all.  Work on the suspend
>> issue first, and after that is all done and working, then consider
>> checkpatch cleanups, those are not that important overall :)
> 
> Yeah, the cleanup part ended up larger than initially anticipated, but I
> don't really expect further changes on the fixup side.  I can handle the
> split if another revision would be still required, or would you like me to
> do this regardless?  I've just made a quick test moving the first patch to
> the end of the series and it didn't cause any conflicts, hence there won't 
> be any dependencies between the two patch sets.

This continues to apply cleanly on recent linux-next, hence I'm not sure if
there's still a need to resend as two separate patch sets.

Please let me know how should we move further.

Thanks,
Cristian