linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: ipq8074: fix PCI-E clock oops

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAOX2RU7=z0BAyUSm8zNi9tbC98tMhe5fREh-=PKscV+aPyq1sg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Sep 2021 16:28:45 +0200
From:   Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>
To:     Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>
Cc:     agross@...nel.org, Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>,
        linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org, linux-clk@...r.kernel.org,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Michael Turquette <mturquette@...libre.com>,
        sivaprak@...eaurora.org, speriaka@...eaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] clk: qcom: ipq8074: fix PCI-E clock oops

On Mon, 28 Jun 2021 at 02:07, Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Quoting Robert Marko (2021-05-18 10:51:53)
> > Fix PCI-E clock related kernel oops that are causes by missing
> > parent_names.
> >
> > Without the use of parent_names kernel will panic on
> > clk_core_get_parent_by_index() due to a NULL pointer.
> >
> > Without this earlycon is needed to even catch the OOPS as it will reset
> > the board before serial is initialized.
>
> Can you share the oops message here in the commit text?
>
> >
> > Fixes: f0cfcf1ade20 ("clk: qcom: ipq8074: Add missing clocks for pcie")
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Marko <robimarko@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-ipq8074.c | 11 +++++------
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-ipq8074.c b/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-ipq8074.c
> > index 0c619ed35c82..8d8b1717a203 100644
> > --- a/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-ipq8074.c
> > +++ b/drivers/clk/qcom/gcc-ipq8074.c
> > @@ -4357,8 +4357,7 @@ static struct clk_rcg2 pcie0_rchng_clk_src = {
> >         .parent_map = gcc_xo_gpll0_map,
> >         .clkr.hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >                 .name = "pcie0_rchng_clk_src",
> > -               .parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw *[]) {
> > -                               &gpll0.clkr.hw },
> > +               .parent_names = gcc_xo_gpll0,
>
> This seems to imply that we need to have two parents but we didn't
> realize that was the case. Ouch! Please use a struct clk_parent_data
> array and then use the firmware name for XO and the clk_hw pointer for
> gpll0.
>
> >                 .num_parents = 2,
> >                 .ops = &clk_rcg2_ops,
> >         },
> > @@ -4372,8 +4371,8 @@ static struct clk_branch gcc_pcie0_rchng_clk = {
> >                 .enable_mask = BIT(1),
> >                 .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >                         .name = "gcc_pcie0_rchng_clk",
> > -                       .parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw *[]){
> > -                               &pcie0_rchng_clk_src.clkr.hw,
> > +                       .parent_names = (const char *[]){
> > +                               "pcie0_rchng_clk_src",
> >                         },
> >                         .num_parents = 1,
> >                         .flags = CLK_SET_RATE_PARENT,
> > @@ -4390,8 +4389,8 @@ static struct clk_branch gcc_pcie0_axi_s_bridge_clk = {
> >                 .enable_mask = BIT(0),
> >                 .hw.init = &(struct clk_init_data){
> >                         .name = "gcc_pcie0_axi_s_bridge_clk",
> > -                       .parent_hws = (const struct clk_hw *[]){
> > -                               &pcie0_axi_clk_src.clkr.hw,
> > +                       .parent_names = (const char *[]){
> > +                               "pcie0_axi_clk_src"
>
> These two hunks can be dropped.

Hi Stephen, sorry for the really late reply.
Essentially it looks this is not necessary in the newer kernels,
I tested again with 5.14 and newer and I don't have a panic anymore.
I was hitting the issue with 5.10 kernel.

Regards,
Robert