[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aXDOg9YXqWyV3JTR@willie-the-truck>
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2026 13:02:59 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
To: Danilo Krummrich <dakr@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>, Wang Jiayue <akaieurus@...il.com>,
hanguidong02@...il.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
rafael@...nel.org, Aishwarya.TCV@....com, chenqiuji666@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
robin.clark@....qualcomm.com, robin.murphy@....com, joro@...tes.org,
iommu@...ts.linux.dev, quic_c_gdjako@...cinc.com,
dmitry.baryshkov@...aro.org, dmitry.baryshkov@....qualcomm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] driver core: enforce device_lock for
driver_match_device()
On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 01:50:52PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> On Wed Jan 21, 2026 at 1:49 PM CET, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 21, 2026 at 12:02:15PM +0100, Danilo Krummrich wrote:
> >
> >> I assume that this should resolve the problem (unless there are more drivers
> >> that register drivers in probe()):
> >
> > This makes sense to me, I guess we can just fix any other instances as
> > they arise. Will you send the patch?
>
> Yes, I will send it soon.
Please make sure you cc Dmitry and Georgi when you do that. I'm worried
that you proposal means we run the probe code once per TBU, which looks
like it will break.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists