[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <VE1PR04MB6768AD4A197FB94209D63C0991100@VE1PR04MB6768.eurprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 02:01:19 +0000
From: Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: "olteanv@...il.com" <olteanv@...il.com>,
"linux-spi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] spi: fsl-dspi: fix NULL pointer dereference
On Thu, Oct 30, 2020 at 21:02PM, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
> Sent: 2020年10月30日 21:02
> To: Qiang Zhao <qiang.zhao@....com>
> Cc: olteanv@...il.com; linux-spi@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: fsl-dspi: fix NULL pointer dereference
>
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 04:40:35PM +0800, Qiang Zhao wrote:
>
> > [ 64.587431] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at
> > virtual address 0000000000000020
> > [..]
> > [ 64.756080] Call trace:
> > [ 64.758526] dspi_suspend+0x30/0x78
> > [ 64.762012] platform_pm_suspend+0x28/0x70
> > [ 64.766107] dpm_run_callback.isra.19+0x24/0x70
> > [ 64.770635] __device_suspend+0xf4/0x2f0
> > [ 64.774553] dpm_suspend+0xec/0x1e0
> > [ 64.778036] dpm_suspend_start+0x80/0xa0
> > [ 64.781957] suspend_devices_and_enter+0x118/0x4f0
> > [ 64.786743] pm_suspend+0x1e0/0x260
> > [ 64.790227] state_store+0x8c/0x118
> > [ 64.793712] kobj_attr_store+0x18/0x30
> > [ 64.797459] sysfs_kf_write+0x40/0x58
> > [ 64.801118] kernfs_fop_write+0x148/0x240
> > [ 64.805126] vfs_write+0xc0/0x230
> > [ 64.808436] ksys_write+0x6c/0x100
> > [ 64.811833] __arm64_sys_write+0x1c/0x28
> > [ 64.815753] el0_svc_common.constprop.3+0x68/0x170
> > [ 64.820541] do_el0_svc+0x24/0x90
> > [ 64.823853] el0_sync_handler+0x118/0x168
> > [ 64.827858] el0_sync+0x158/0x180
>
> Please think hard before including complete backtraces in upstream reports,
> they are very large and contain almost no useful information relative to their
> size so often obscure the relevant content in your message. If part of the
> backtrace is usefully illustrative (it often is for search engines if nothing else)
> then it's usually better to pull out the relevant sections.
Ok, will modified in next version.
Best Regards,
Qiang Zhao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists