linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: cros_ec_dev: Add missing mfd_remove

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20181211061207.GE4497@dell>
Date:   Tue, 11 Dec 2018 06:12:07 +0000
From:   Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
To:     Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
Cc:     groeck@...omium.org, gwendal@...omium.org, kernel@...labora.com,
        bleung@...omium.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: cros_ec_dev: Add missing mfd_remove_devices() call
 in remove

On Mon, 10 Dec 2018, Enric Balletbo i Serra wrote:

> The driver adds different MFD child devices via mfd_add_devices() and
> hence it is required to call mfd_remove_devices() to remove MFD child
> devices.
> 
> Fixes: 5e0115581bbc ("cros_ec: Move cros_ec_dev module to drivers/mfd")
> Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Enric Balletbo i Serra <enric.balletbo@...labora.com>
> ---
> Hi Lee,
> 
> I saw that you send a mfd-fixes pull request this morning, so sorry in
> advance for sending this too late. This was broken since the driver
> moved from platform/chrome to mfd (and probably before that), so
> it's an old problem. Note that I plan to send a patch series that depends
> on this to apply cleanly. If the patch is fine with you and there is any
> possibility to go in this version that will be good, if not, let me know
> if you prefer queue this in your for-next branch or if you prefer I
> include the patch on the series I plan to send on top of it to not mess
> things.

It wouldn't have made the v4.20-rcs anyway.  Even if you did send it
earlier.  I only send fixes to that -rcs which fix issues introduced
during the current release cycle.

If memory serves, doesn't this driver now (or will in the very near
future) use devm_* for device creation?  That would make this patch
either incorrect (should be devm_mfd_remove_devices() if really
required) or moot?

>  drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
> index b99a194ce5a4..2d0fee488c5a 100644
> --- a/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/mfd/cros_ec_dev.c
> @@ -499,6 +499,7 @@ static int ec_device_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	cros_ec_debugfs_remove(ec);
>  
> +	mfd_remove_devices(ec->dev);
>  	cdev_del(&ec->cdev);
>  	device_unregister(&ec->class_dev);
>  	return 0;

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]
Linaro Services Technical Lead
Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: Facebook | Twitter | Blog