netdev - phy_attach_direct()'s use of device_bind

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAGETcx9YpCUMmHjyydMtOJP9SKBbVsHNB-9SspD9u=txJ12Gug@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:13:48 -0800
From:   Saravana Kannan <saravanak@...gle.com>
To:     Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        Russell King <linux@...linux.org.uk>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Android Kernel Team <kernel-team@...roid.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Subject: phy_attach_direct()'s use of device_bind_driver()

Hi,

This email was triggered by this other email[1].

Why is phy_attach_direct() directly calling device_bind_driver()
instead of using bus_probe_device()? I'm asking because this is
causing device links status to not get updated correctly and causes
this[2] warning.

We can fix the device links issue with something like this[3], but
want to understand the reason for the current implementation of
phy_attach_direct() before we go ahead and put in that fix.

Thanks,
Saravana

[1] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/e11bc6a2-ec9d-ea3b-71f7-13c9f764bbfc@nvidia.com/#t
[2] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/56f7d032-ba5a-a8c7-23de-2969d98c527e@nvidia.com/
[3] - https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/6a43e209-1d2d-b10a-4564-0289d54135d3@nvidia.com/