linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] dmaengine: fsl-edma: free irq correctly in remove pathy

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]

Message-ID: <ZyUeAc6rNbGDLKfO@lizhi-Precision-Tower-5810>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 14:29:21 -0400
From: Frank Li <Frank.li@....com>
To: "Peng Fan (OSS)" <peng.fan@....nxp.com>
Cc: Vinod Koul <vkoul@...nel.org>,
	"open list:FREESCALE eDMA DRIVER" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>,
	"open list:FREESCALE eDMA DRIVER" <dmaengine@...r.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] dmaengine: fsl-edma: free irq correctly in remove
 pathy

On Fri, Nov 01, 2024 at 06:14:10PM +0800, Peng Fan (OSS) wrote:
> From: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
>
> To i.MX9, there is no valid fsl_edma->txirq/errirq, so add a check in
> fsl_edma_irq_exit to avoid issues.
>
> Fixes: 44eb827264de ("dmaengine: fsl-edma: request per-channel IRQ only when channel is allocated")
> Signed-off-by: Peng Fan <peng.fan@....com>
> ---
>  drivers/dma/fsl-edma-main.c | 12 +++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/dma/fsl-edma-main.c b/drivers/dma/fsl-edma-main.c
> index 01bd5cb24a49..89c54eeb4925 100644
> --- a/drivers/dma/fsl-edma-main.c
> +++ b/drivers/dma/fsl-edma-main.c
> @@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ fsl_edma2_irq_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>
>  		/* The last IRQ is for eDMA err */
>  		if (i == count - 1) {
> +			fsl_edma->errirq = irq;
>  			ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, irq,
>  						fsl_edma_err_handler,
>  						0, "eDMA2-ERR", fsl_edma);
> @@ -322,10 +323,13 @@ static void fsl_edma_irq_exit(
>  		struct platform_device *pdev, struct fsl_edma_engine *fsl_edma)
>  {
>  	if (fsl_edma->txirq == fsl_edma->errirq) {
> -		devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq, fsl_edma);
> +		if (fsl_edma->txirq >= 0)
> +			devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq, fsl_edma);
>  	} else {
> -		devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq, fsl_edma);
> -		devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->errirq, fsl_edma);
> +		if (fsl_edma->txirq >= 0)
> +			devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->txirq, fsl_edma);
> +		if (fsl_edma->errirq >= 0)
> +			devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, fsl_edma->errirq, fsl_edma);
>  	}
>  }
>
> @@ -485,6 +489,8 @@ static int fsl_edma_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (!fsl_edma)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>
> +	fsl_edma->errirq = -EINVAL;
> +	fsl_edma->txirq = -EINVAL;

why not use 0 as invalidate?

Frank

>  	fsl_edma->drvdata = drvdata;
>  	fsl_edma->n_chans = chans;
>  	mutex_init(&fsl_edma->fsl_edma_mutex);
> --
> 2.37.1
>