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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Tue, 15 Nov 2022 12:18:00 +0100
From:   Marijn Suijten <marijn.suijten@...ainline.org>
To:     Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
Cc:     Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
        linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>,
        Konrad Dybcio <konrad.dybcio@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpiolib: of: Use correct fwnode for DT-probed chips

On 2022-11-14 16:15:25, Brian Masney wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 12:37:32PM +0100, Thierry Reding wrote:
> > From: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
> > 
> > The OF node store in chip->fwnode is used to explicitly override the FW
> > node for a GPIO chip. For chips that use the default FW node (i.e. that
> > of their parent device), this will be NULL and cause the chip not to be
> > fully registered.
> > 
> > Instead, use the GPIO device's FW node, which is set to either the node
> > of the parent device or the explicit override in chip->fwnode.
> > 
> > Fixes: 8afe82550240 ("gpiolib: of: Prepare of_gpiochip_add() / of_gpiochip_remove() for fwnode")
> > Tested-by: Marek Szyprowski <m.szyprowski@...sung.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Thierry Reding <treding@...dia.com>
> 
> Reviewed-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
> Tested-by: Brian Masney <bmasney@...hat.com>
> 
> I separately sent a similar type of patch to fix the same issue today:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20221114202943.2389489-1-bmasney@redhat.com/T/#u

For completeness, your linked patch fixes a synchronous external abort
on multiple Qualcomm platforms pointed out in [1].  This patch however
does not, are you sure they fix the exact same issue?

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20221115110800.35gl3j43lmbxm3jb@SoMainline.org/

- Marijn

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ