[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180627085511.GA31924@botnar.kaiser.cx>
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 10:55:11 +0200
From: Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
To: Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com>
Cc: Boris Brezillon <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>,
linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mtd: rawnand: mxc: remove __init qualifier from
mxcnd_probe_dt
Hi Miquel & Boris,
thanks for your feedback.
Thus wrote Miquel Raynal (miquel.raynal@...tlin.com):
> Hi Boris,
> On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:24:13 +0200, Boris Brezillon
> <boris.brezillon@...tlin.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Jun 2018 09:10:05 +0200
> > Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@...tlin.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Martin, Boris,
> > > On Fri, 22 Jun 2018 16:50:25 +0200, Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
> > > wrote:
> > > > mxcnd_probe_dt is called from mxcnd_probe, which is not marked as __init.
> > > I think this line is just a side note and should be at the end of the
> > > commit log.
> > > > Using the sysfs unbind, bind nodes, mxcnd_probe and mxcnd_probe_dt can
> > > > potentially be called at any time. After the __init functions are cleaned,
> > > > mxcnd_probe_dt is no longer available. Calling it anyway causes a crash.
> > > The above paragraph explains the problem and the solution, you can just
> > > add something like "mcvnd_probe is untouched because it is already not
> > > marked as __init" instead of the first line.
> > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Kaiser <martin@...ser.cx>
> > > Boris, do you think this patch is a good candidate for stable?
> > > If yes, Martin, could you please add a couple of stable/fixes tags above
> > > your SoB?
> > We should at least have a Fixes tag. For the stable one, I'm not so
> > sure because the bug does not exist in practice (the compiler always
> > inline mxcnd_probe_dt()).
> Fine, then a Fixes tag will be enough and I will take it into
> nand/next as it is not urgent at all to have it in the main tree.
I agree that this is not a candidate for stable. I just sent an update
with a Fixes tag and rephrased commit message.
Best regards,
Martin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists