[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YMmSqtZ9OGIWs+dW@kroah.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2021 07:56:58 +0200
From: Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To: Siddharth Gupta <sidgup@...eaurora.org>
Cc: bjorn.andersson@...aro.org, ohad@...ery.com,
linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, psodagud@...eaurora.org,
stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] remoteproc: core: Cleanup device in case of
failure
On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 01:21:11PM -0700, Siddharth Gupta wrote:
>
> On 6/15/2021 12:06 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 15, 2021 at 12:03:44PM -0700, Siddharth Gupta wrote:
> > > When a failure occurs in rproc_add() it returns an error, but does
> > > not cleanup after itself. This change adds the failure path in such
> > > cases.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Siddharth Gupta <sidgup@...eaurora.org>
> > > Cc: stable@...r.kernel.org
> > > ---
> > > drivers/remoteproc/remoteproc_core.c | 15 ++++++++++++---
> > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> > Why is this needed for stable kernels? And again, a Fixes: tag?
> Patch 2 and patch 3 are leading up to fix rproc_add()
> in case of a failure. This means we'll have errors with
> use after free unless we call device_del() or cdev_del(),
> also the sysfs and devtempfs nodes will also not be
> removed.
Then please explain that better in the changelogs. At it is, no one
knows this.
greg k-h
Powered by blists - more mailing lists