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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 19 May 2015 17:22:26 +0200
From:	Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>
To:	Alan Stern <stern@...land.harvard.edu>
Cc:	Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.de>, Laura Abbott <labbott@...hat.com>,
	Laura Abbott <labbott@...oraproject.org>,
	"Gustavo F. Padovan" <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
	Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"bluez mailin list (linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org)" 
	<linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Ming Lei <ming.lei@...onical.com>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH] Bluetooth: Make request workqueue freezable

Hi Alan,

>>>> I am not convinced. Now we are hacking the Bluetooth core layer
>>>> (which has nothing to do with the drivers suspend/resume or
>>>> probe) to do something different so that we do not see this
>>>> warning.
>>>> 
>>>> I can not do anything about the platform in question choosing a
>>>> unplug/replug for suspend/resume instead of having a proper USB
>>>> suspend and resume handling. That is pretty much out of our
>>>> control.
> 
> Actually one can do something about this.  I mean, one _can_ implement
> proper USB suspend and resume handling in the Bluetooth driver.  At
> this point the details aren't clear to me, but perhaps if the driver in
> question had a reset_resume callback then it might work better.

the btusb.ko driver has suspend/resume support. Are you saying we also need reset_resume support?

>>>> I would rather have the USB subsystem delay the probe()
>>>> callback if we tell it to.
> 
> This is possible.  I am not sure it would be the right thing to do,
> though.  What happens if the probe routine gets called early on during
> the boot-up procedure, before userspace is up and running?  The same
> thing should happen here.

For modules this will be hard. Since you need userspace before being able to load the modules. If built-in code, then in theory this might be possible. Depending on the order of the init sections.

>>>> Of just have request_firmware()
>>>> actually sleep until userspace is ready. Seriously, why is
>>>> request_firmware not just sleeping for us.
> 
> It won't work.  The request_firmware call is part of the probe 
> sequence, which in turn is part of the resume sequence.  Userspace 
> doesn't start running again until the resume sequence is finished.  If 
> request_firmware waited for userspace, it would hang.

Then I really have no idea on how to solve this unless we silence the warning from request_firmware. From a driver perspective we go back trough probe(). So the driver has to treat this as a new device.

Regards

Marcel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists