linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2] serial: qcom_geni: Fix pinctrl deadlock on runtime resume

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: <641256da-e142-4a35-9089-d3833baec6fd@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2025 09:30:48 +0900
From: Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk@...nel.org>
To: Jorge Ramirez <jorge.ramirez@....qualcomm.com>
Cc: Praveen Talari <praveen.talari@....qualcomm.com>,
 Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
 Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@...nel.org>,
 Bryan O'Donoghue <bryan.odonoghue@...aro.org>,
 Praveen Talari <quic_ptalari@...cinc.com>, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
 alexey.klimov@...aro.org, dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com,
 andersson@...nel.org, psodagud@...cinc.com, djaggi@...cinc.com,
 quic_msavaliy@...cinc.com, quic_vtanuku@...cinc.com,
 quic_arandive@...cinc.com, quic_shazhuss@...cinc.com,
 quic_cchiluve@...cinc.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] serial: qcom_geni: Fix pinctrl deadlock on runtime
 resume

On 18/09/2025 19:07, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
> On 18/09/25 09:25:48, Jorge Ramirez wrote:
>>
>> let's test a bit further Praveen - we need to validate/trace the wake
>> path on a real scenairo to make sure it is not cpu intensive (although I
>> suspect the 2% was due to the storm you described more than to the code
>> path itself)
>>
>> I can then provide the tested-by on the list.
>>
> 
> um bluetooh comms are broken - reverting the runtime_pm patch fixes it.
> and the proposed fix (V2) does not address this scenario.
> 
> I agree with the common sentiment, I think the patch should be reverted
> in linux-next and better test definition shared.

For the record, the revert was already applied.

Any new patch here should carry some more tested-by, before it can get
applied.

Best regards,
Krzysztof