linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH -next 2/2] spi: microchip-core: switch to use devm_spi_alloc

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]

Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 10:14:06 +0800
From:   Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@...wei.com>
To:     <Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com>
CC:     <Daire.McNamara@...rochip.com>, <broonie@...nel.org>,
        <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next 2/2] spi: microchip-core: switch to use
 devm_spi_alloc_master()


On 2022/7/13 4:50, Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com wrote:
> On 12/07/2022 15:03, Conor.Dooley@...rochip.com wrote:
>> On 12/07/2022 14:53, Yang Yingliang wrote:
>>> [Some people who received this message don't often get email from yangyingliang@...wei.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
>>>
>>> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>>>
>>> Switch to use devm_spi_alloc_master() to simpify error path.
>> Hey Yang,
>> Thanks for trying to fix my mistakes!
>>
>> Forgive my innocence here, but why is it okay to remove the
>> spi_master_put() in remove() but not the one in the error path of
>> the probe function?
>>
>> If the devm_add_action_or_reset() in devm_spi_register_controller()
>> fails won't the same thing apply to the probe error path?
>>
>> IOW, I think this patch needs a fixes tag too b/c it also fixes a
>> refcount underflow. Please correct me if I am misunderstanding.
> Ahh, I just saw your revert of 59ebbe40fb51 ("spi: simplify
> devm_spi register_controller"). With that, this makes a lot more
> sense.
>
>> One other comment below.
> This comment still applies for this patch. dev_err_probe would be
> nice.
OK.

Thanks,
Yang
>
> Thanks,
> Conor.