[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZYRiQpt56IVYhwOg@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2023 18:05:22 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: Hugo Villeneuve <hugo@...ovil.com>
Cc: gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, jirislaby@...nel.org, jringle@...dpoint.com,
kubakici@...pl, phil@...pberrypi.org, bo.svangard@...eddedart.se,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-serial@...r.kernel.org,
Hugo Villeneuve <hvilleneuve@...onoff.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Yury Norov <yury.norov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/18] serial: sc16is7xx: fix invalid sc16is7xx_lines
bitfield in case of probe error
On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:56:39AM -0500, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Dec 2023 17:40:42 +0200
> Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 12:18:46PM -0500, Hugo Villeneuve wrote:
...
> > Yes, this seems to be the correct one to fix the problem described in
> > the patch 1. I dunno why the patch 1 even exists.
>
> Hi,
> this will indeed fix the problem described in patch 1.
>
> However, if I remove patch 1, and I simulate the same probe error as
> described in patch 1, now we get stuck forever when trying to
> remove the driver. This is something that I observed before and
> that patch 1 also corrected.
>
> The problem is caused in sc16is7xx_remove() when calling this function
>
> kthread_flush_worker(&s->kworker);
>
> I am not sure how best to handle that without patch 1.
So, it means we need to root cause this issue. Because patch 1 looks
really bogus.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists