[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87a5vsb9tg.fsf@bytedance.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2023 09:10:51 +0100
From: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@...edance.com>
To: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@...edance.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Vikram Sethi <vsethi@...dia.com>,
Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH] firmware: smccc: Fix use of
uninitialised results structure
Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com> writes:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 09:38:26AM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2023 18:17:02 +0100,
>> Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@...edance.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Commit 35727af2b15d ("irqchip/gicv3: Workaround for NVIDIA erratum
>> > T241-FABRIC-4") moved the initialisation of the SoC version to
>> > arm_smccc_version_init() but forgot to update the results structure
>> > and it's usage.
>> >
>> > Fix the use of the uninitialised results structure and update the
>> > error strings.
>> >
>> > Fixes: 35727af2b15d ("irqchip/gicv3: Workaround for NVIDIA erratum T241-FABRIC-4")
>> > Signed-off-by: Punit Agrawal <punit.agrawal@...edance.com>
>> > Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.holla@....com>
>> > Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
>> > Cc: Vikram Sethi <vsethi@...dia.com>
>> > Cc: Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@...dia.com>
>> > ---
>> > drivers/firmware/smccc/soc_id.c | 5 ++---
>> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/smccc/soc_id.c b/drivers/firmware/smccc/soc_id.c
>> > index 890eb454599a..1990263fbba0 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/firmware/smccc/soc_id.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/smccc/soc_id.c
>> > @@ -34,7 +34,6 @@ static struct soc_device_attribute *soc_dev_attr;
>> >
>> > static int __init smccc_soc_init(void)
>> > {
>> > - struct arm_smccc_res res;
>> > int soc_id_rev, soc_id_version;
>> > static char soc_id_str[20], soc_id_rev_str[12];
>> > static char soc_id_jep106_id_str[12];
>> > @@ -49,13 +48,13 @@ static int __init smccc_soc_init(void)
>> > }
>> >
>> > if (soc_id_version < 0) {
>> > - pr_err("ARCH_SOC_ID(0) returned error: %lx\n", res.a0);
>> > + pr_err("Invalid SoC Version: %x\n", soc_id_version);
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> > }
>> >
>> > soc_id_rev = arm_smccc_get_soc_id_revision();
>> > if (soc_id_rev < 0) {
>> > - pr_err("ARCH_SOC_ID(1) returned error: %lx\n", res.a0);
>> > + pr_err("Invalid SoC Revision: %x\n", soc_id_rev);
>> > return -EINVAL;
>> > }
>> >
>>
>> Ah, indeed. Well caught. FWIW:
>>
>> Acked-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Thanks Marc.
>> Sudeep, I assume you'll take that one directly?
>>
>
> Sure I will route it via (arm-)soc team.
Sudeep, hope you can add the tag while applying. Let me know if you'd
like me to resend.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists