[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151129095411.GA10431@pengutronix.de>
Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:54:11 +0100
From: Uwe Kleine-König
<u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>
To: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: martin.wilck@...fujitsu.com, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] base/platform: fix panic when probe
function is NULL
Hello Jarkko,
On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 06:34:47PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2015 at 08:01:34PM +0100, martin.wilck@...fujitsu.com wrote:
> > From: Martin Wilck <Martin.Wilck@...fujitsu.com>
> >
> > Since b8b2c7d845d5, platform_drv_probe() is called for all platform
> > devices. If drv->probe is NULL, and dev_pm_domain_attach() fails,
> > platform_drv_probe() will return the error code from dev_pm_domain_attach().
> >
> > This causes real_probe() to enter the "probe_failed" path and set
> > dev->driver to NULL. Before b8b2c7d845d5, real_probe() would assume
> > success if both dev->bus->probe and drv->probe are missing.
> >
> > This may cause a panic later. For example, inserting the tpm_tis
> > driver with parameter "force=1" (i.e. registering tpm_tis as a platform
> > driver) will panic in tpmm_chip_alloc() because dev->driver is NULL:
> >
> > chip->cdev.owner = chip->pdev->driver->owner;
> >
> > This patch fixes this by returning success in platform_drv_probe() if
> > "just" dev_pm_domain_attach() had failed. This restores the semantics
> > of platform_device_register_XXX() if the associated platform driver has
> > no "probe" function.
> >
> > Fixes: b8b2c7d845d5 ("base/platform: assert that dev_pm_domain
> > callbacks are called unconditionally")
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Martin Wilck <Martin.Wilck@...fujitsu.com>
>
> Acked-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com>
While the patch is fine, the commit log is not. It blames b8b2c7d845d5
to be responsible for a panic, but in fact it only breaks the wrong
assumption of the tpm_tis driver.
So I'm not sure how to interpret your Ack, IMHO it should not make
gregkh pick up the patch as is.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists