linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next] spi: bcm-qspi: Fix missing clk_disable_unprepare() on error in bcm_qspi

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: <163501903283.919250.3449151714260187451.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date:   Sat, 23 Oct 2021 20:58:01 +0100
From:   Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
Cc:     Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com, kdasu.kdev@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] spi: bcm-qspi: Fix missing clk_disable_unprepare() on error in bcm_qspi_probe()

On Mon, 18 Oct 2021 15:34:13 +0800, Yang Yingliang wrote:
> Fix the missing clk_disable_unprepare() before return
> from bcm_qspi_probe() in the error handling case.
> 
> 

Applied to

   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/broonie/spi.git for-next

Thanks!

[1/1] spi: bcm-qspi: Fix missing clk_disable_unprepare() on error in bcm_qspi_probe()
      commit: 0204bdeb3df79a5c78d9e76119a7f04e3dcb1258

All being well this means that it will be integrated into the linux-next
tree (usually sometime in the next 24 hours) and sent to Linus during
the next merge window (or sooner if it is a bug fix), however if
problems are discovered then the patch may be dropped or reverted.

You may get further e-mails resulting from automated or manual testing
and review of the tree, please engage with people reporting problems and
send followup patches addressing any issues that are reported if needed.

If any updates are required or you are submitting further changes they
should be sent as incremental updates against current git, existing
patches will not be replaced.

Please add any relevant lists and maintainers to the CCs when replying
to this mail.

Thanks,
Mark