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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 11:46:37 +0300 From: Serge Semin <fancer.lancer@...il.com> To: Damien Le Moal <damien.lemoal@...nsource.wdc.com>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> Cc: Anders Roxell <anders.roxell@...aro.org>, Niklas Cassel <Niklas.Cassel@....com>, Naresh Kamboju <naresh.kamboju@...aro.org>, Praneeth Bajjuri <praneeth@...com>, Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@...kalelectronics.ru>, open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Linux ARM <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>, "regressions@...ts.linux.dev" <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>, "open list:LIBATA SUBSYSTEM (Serial and Parallel ATA drivers)" <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>, "lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org" <lkft-triage@...ts.linaro.org>, Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@...il.com>, Carlos Hernandez <ceh@...com>, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org> Subject: Re: TI: X15 the connected SSD is not detected on Linux next 20221006 tag On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 10:24:22PM +0900, Damien Le Moal wrote: > On 12/5/22 19:08, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 5, 2022, at 02:11, Serge Semin wrote: > >> On Thu, Dec 01, 2022 at 12:48:32PM +0100, Anders Roxell wrote: > > > >>> > >>> for (i = 0; i < hpriv->n_clks; i++) { > >>> - if (!strcmp(hpriv->clks[i].id, con_id)) > >>> + if (hpriv->clks && hpriv->clks[i].id && > >>> + !strcmp(hpriv->clks[i].id, con_id)) > >>> return hpriv->clks[i].clk; > >>> } > >> > >> Indeed I should have taken into account that devm_clk_bulk_get_all() > >> can get unnamed clocks too. But checking the hpriv->clks pointer for > >> being not null is redundant, since the ahci_platform_get_resources() > >> procedure makes sure that the array is always allocated. At the very > >> least you shouldn't check the pointer in the loop, but can make sure > >> that the clks array is available before it. > > > > Do you think this is otherwise the correct fix then? Any chance we > > can still get a version of it into 6.1? I'll think of a better solution. But at this stage it seems like the best choice seeing the bindings permit having unnamed clocks specified. > > If someone sends me a proper patch to apply, I can send a last PR for 6.1 > to Linus before week end. I'll submit the patch today. Thanks. -Serge(y) > > > > > > Arnd > > -- > Damien Le Moal > Western Digital Research >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists