linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] mfd: mt6360: Fix register driver NULL pointer by add driver name

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: <1db40ad0-faf4-2a4a-8514-fed59d5053f7@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 9 Jun 2020 14:01:19 +0200
From:   Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>
To:     Gene Chen <gene.chen.richtek@...il.com>,
        Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>, Wilma.Wu@...iatek.com,
        shufan_lee@...htek.com, cy_huang@...htek.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mfd: mt6360: Fix register driver NULL pointer by add
 driver name



On 09/06/2020 13:43, Gene Chen wrote:
> Lee Jones <lee.jones@...aro.org> 於 2020年6月9日 週二 上午3:28寫道：
>>
>> On Mon, 08 Jun 2020, Gene Chen wrote:
>>
>>> From: Gene Chen <gene_chen@...htek.com>
>>>
>>> accidentally remove driver name when
>>> replace probe by probe_new in add mt6360 mfd driver patch v4
>>>
>>> [  121.243012] EAX: c2a8bc64 EBX: 00000000 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000
>>> [  121.243012] ESI: c2a8bc79 EDI: 00000000 EBP: e54bdea8 ESP: e54bdea0
>>> [  121.243012] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 0000 GS: 0000 SS: 0068 EFLAGS: 00010286
>>> [  121.243012] CR0: 80050033 CR2: 00000000 CR3: 02ec3000 CR4: 000006b0
>>> [  121.243012] Call Trace:
>>> [  121.243012]  kset_find_obj+0x3d/0xc0
>>> [  121.243012]  driver_find+0x16/0x40
>>> [  121.243012]  driver_register+0x49/0x100
>>> [  121.243012]  ? i2c_for_each_dev+0x39/0x50
>>> [  121.243012]  ? __process_new_adapter+0x20/0x20
>>> [  121.243012]  ? cht_wc_driver_init+0x11/0x11
>>> [  121.243012]  i2c_register_driver+0x30/0x80
>>> [  121.243012]  ? intel_lpss_pci_driver_init+0x16/0x16
>>> [  121.243012]  mt6360_pmu_driver_init+0xf/0x11
>>> [  121.243012]  do_one_initcall+0x33/0x1a0
>>> [  121.243012]  ? parse_args+0x1eb/0x3d0
>>> [  121.243012]  ? __might_sleep+0x31/0x90
>>> [  121.243012]  ? kernel_init_freeable+0x10a/0x17f
>>> [  121.243012]  kernel_init_freeable+0x12c/0x17f
>>> [  121.243012]  ? rest_init+0x110/0x110
>>> [  121.243012]  kernel_init+0xb/0x100
>>> [  121.243012]  ? schedule_tail_wrapper+0x9/0xc
>>> [  121.243012]  ret_from_fork+0x19/0x24
>>> [  121.243012] Modules linked in:
>>> [  121.243012] CR2: 0000000000000000
>>> [  121.243012] random: get_random_bytes called from init_oops_id+0x3a/0x40 with crng_init=0
>>> [  121.243012] ---[ end trace 38a803400f1a2bee ]---
>>> [  121.243012] EIP: strcmp+0x11/0x30
>>
>> How did this driver ever work for you?
>>
> 
> i ask my coworker help me verify.
> i will check the patch myself, sincerely apologies for this.
> 

BTW for which SoC this PMIC is used for?
Maybe it would be useful to have some development HW to be able to verify patches.

Regards,
Matthias