From: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
To: Johan Hovold <johan@kernel.org>
Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com>,
Linus Walleij <linusw@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] Revert "revocable: Revocable resource management"
Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2026 20:42:39 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260124184239.GO215800@killaraus> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260124170535.11756-1-johan@kernel.org>
On Sat, Jan 24, 2026 at 06:05:32PM +0100, Johan Hovold wrote:
> I was surprised to learn that the revocable functionality was merged last week
> given the community feedback on list and at LPC, but not least since there are
> no users of it, which we are supposed to require to be able to evaluate it
> properly.
>
> The chromeos ec driver issue which motivated this work turned out not to need
> it as was found during review. And the example gpiolib conversion was posted
> the very same morning that this was merged which hardly provides enough time
> for evaluation (even if Bartosz quickly reported a performance regression).
>
> Turns out there are correctness issues with both the gpiolib conversion and
> the revocable design itself that can lead to use-after-free and hung tasks (see
> [1] and patch 3/3).
>
> And as was pointed out repeatedly during review, and again at the day of the
> merge, this does not look like the right interface for the chardev unplug
> issue.
>
> Revert the revocable implementation until a redesign has been proposed and
> evaluated properly.
I have voiced some of the concerns listed above. This was merge way too
quickly, without proper review and evaluation of the API as a solution
for the problem at hand. I don't want to see this API spreading through
drivers the same way devm_kzalloc() did without developers understanding
the limitations, it's just another recipe for disaster. I trust that we
have enough knowledge and wisdom in the community to implement correct
solutions to the producer-consumer races.
Acked-by: Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/aXT45B6vLf9R3Pbf@hovoldconsulting.com/
>
>
> Johan Hovold (3):
> Revert "selftests: revocable: Add kselftest cases"
> Revert "revocable: Add Kunit test cases"
> Revert "revocable: Revocable resource management"
>
> .../driver-api/driver-model/index.rst | 1 -
> .../driver-api/driver-model/revocable.rst | 152 -----------
> MAINTAINERS | 9 -
> drivers/base/Kconfig | 8 -
> drivers/base/Makefile | 5 +-
> drivers/base/revocable.c | 241 ------------------
> drivers/base/revocable_test.c | 142 -----------
> include/linux/revocable.h | 69 -----
> tools/testing/selftests/Makefile | 1 -
> .../selftests/drivers/base/revocable/Makefile | 7 -
> .../drivers/base/revocable/revocable_test.c | 136 ----------
> .../drivers/base/revocable/test-revocable.sh | 39 ---
> .../base/revocable/test_modules/Makefile | 10 -
> .../revocable/test_modules/revocable_test.c | 195 --------------
> 14 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 1014 deletions(-)
> delete mode 100644 Documentation/driver-api/driver-model/revocable.rst
> delete mode 100644 drivers/base/revocable.c
> delete mode 100644 drivers/base/revocable_test.c
> delete mode 100644 include/linux/revocable.h
> delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/base/revocable/Makefile
> delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/base/revocable/revocable_test.c
> delete mode 100755 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/base/revocable/test-revocable.sh
> delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/base/revocable/test_modules/Makefile
> delete mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/base/revocable/test_modules/revocable_test.c
--
Regards,
Laurent Pinchart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-24 18:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-24 17:05 [PATCH 0/3] Revert "revocable: Revocable resource management" Johan Hovold
2026-01-24 17:05 ` [PATCH 1/3] Revert "selftests: revocable: Add kselftest cases" Johan Hovold
2026-01-24 17:05 ` [PATCH 2/3] Revert "revocable: Add Kunit test cases" Johan Hovold
2026-01-24 17:05 ` [PATCH 3/3] Revert "revocable: Revocable resource management" Johan Hovold
2026-01-24 17:37 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-24 17:46 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-26 13:20 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-27 15:57 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-01-24 18:42 ` Laurent Pinchart [this message]
2026-01-24 19:08 ` [PATCH 0/3] " Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-25 12:47 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-01-25 13:22 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-25 14:07 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-29 1:09 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-25 13:24 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-25 17:53 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-26 0:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-26 16:08 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-26 17:07 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-26 22:36 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-28 23:40 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-26 13:50 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-27 21:18 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-27 23:52 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-28 9:40 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-28 10:01 ` Wolfram Sang
2026-01-28 15:05 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-28 15:20 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-28 16:01 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-30 11:27 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-28 16:58 ` Wolfram Sang
2026-01-29 1:08 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 1:23 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-29 3:42 ` dan.j.williams
2026-01-29 9:56 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-29 10:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-30 0:36 ` dan.j.williams
2026-01-29 10:38 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 13:34 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-29 14:52 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 22:29 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-30 9:10 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-02-03 9:10 ` Maxime Ripard
2026-02-03 13:59 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-28 15:48 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-29 9:11 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-29 10:56 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 13:50 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-29 14:28 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2026-01-29 14:45 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 14:49 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 22:00 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-01-30 11:19 ` Bartosz Golaszewski
2026-01-29 13:27 ` Linus Walleij
2026-02-03 12:15 ` Johan Hovold
2026-02-03 12:26 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-02-03 12:30 ` [PATCH] driver core: disable revocable code from build Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-02-03 13:20 ` Danilo Krummrich
2026-02-04 2:14 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-02-04 5:28 ` [PATCH] selftests: Disable " Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-02-04 8:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-02-03 13:57 ` [PATCH 0/3] Revert "revocable: Revocable resource management" Laurent Pinchart
2026-02-03 15:44 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2026-02-04 14:36 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-27 15:57 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-01-28 14:23 ` Johan Hovold
2026-01-28 23:28 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-29 15:01 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2026-01-30 9:12 ` Laurent Pinchart
2026-01-30 17:41 ` Danilo Krummrich
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=20260124184239.GO215800@killaraus \
--to=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=bartosz.golaszewski@oss.qualcomm.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=johan@kernel.org \
--cc=linusw@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=tzungbi@kernel.org \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
/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