From: Borislav Petkov <bp@amd64.org>
To: Julia Lawall <julia@diku.dk>
Cc: Tigran Aivazian <tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk>,
<kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
<x86@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arch/x86/kernel/microcode_core.c: add missing platform_device_unregister
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 18:33:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110824163354.GC21066@gere.osrc.amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1108241742480.25172@ask.diku.dk>
On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 05:44:08PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> That seems like a fairly big change. Is it desirable to move the calls to
> sysdev_driver_register and microcode_dev_init up over the get_online_cpus
> ... put_online_cpus sequence?
Well, you need microcode_pdev for request_firmware() which happens
when you do sysdev_driver_register() so it has to run after
platform_device_register_simple().
And the microcode_dev_init() thing got moved further
down in 871b72dd1e12afc3f024479531d25a9339d2e3f9 but its
counterpart microcode_dev_exit() is mistakenly called if
platform_device_register_simple() fails which is clearly another bug.
And frankly, microcode_dev_init() is strictly needed only for the
CONFIG_MICROCODE_OLD_INTERFACE. And on the driver destroy path
microcode_exit() is calling microcode_dev_exit() first so it could be
that 871b72dd1e12afc3f024479531d25a9339d2e3f9 mistakenly moved the
microcode_dev_init() call down.
I guess you could move the microcode_dev_init() call up, before
platform_device_register_simple() but this needs testing on Intel
because they still can do microcode loading over the old interface using
microcode_ctl userspace helper...
Or, you can do a bit cleaner version of the goto-with-labels thing by
adding a helper like this:
static void __microcode_sysdev_unregister(void)
{
get_online_cpus();
mutex_lock(µcode_mutex);
sysdev_driver_unregister(&cpu_sysdev_class, &mc_sysdev_driver);
mutex_unlock(µcode_mutex);
put_online_cpus();
}
and call it both on the error-out path in microcode_init(), and in
microcode_exit().
Oh boy, the rabbit hole turns out to be pretty deep once you go down
into it :-).
Btw, I totally understand if you've lost all desire to fix that properly
after all this :-).
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH
Einsteinring 24, 85609 Dornach
GM: Alberto Bozzo
Reg: Dornach, Landkreis Muenchen
HRB Nr. 43632 WEEE Registernr: 129 19551
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-08-24 16:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-08-24 15:10 Julia Lawall
2011-08-24 15:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2011-08-24 15:44 ` Julia Lawall
2011-08-24 16:33 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20110824163354.GC21066@gere.osrc.amd.com \
--to=bp@amd64.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=julia@diku.dk \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tigran@aivazian.fsnet.co.uk \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®