[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aEw_QrVk9m1TJof3@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 18:09:54 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...el.com>
To: David Lechner <dlechner@...libre.com>, Hans de Goede <hansg@...nel.org>
Cc: Marek Vasut <marek.vasut+bmc150@...lbox.org>, linux-iio@...r.kernel.org,
Nuno Sá <nuno.sa@...log.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@...nel.org>,
Jonathan Cameron <jic23@...nel.org>,
Julien Stephan <jstephan@...libre.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@...ian.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] iio: accel: bmc150: Do not configure IRQ registers if no
IRQ connected
+Hans here as well.
On Fri, Jun 13, 2025 at 10:03:34AM -0500, David Lechner wrote:
> On 6/13/25 7:45 AM, Marek Vasut wrote:
> > The BMC150 on Onemix 2S does not have IRQ line described in ACPI tables,
> > which leads to bmc150_accel_core_probe() being called with irq=0, which
> > leads to bmc150_accel_interrupts_setup() never being called, which leads
> > to struct bmc150_accel_data *data ->interrupts[i].info being left unset
> > to NULL. Later, userspace can indirectly trigger bmc150_accel_set_interrupt()
> > which depends on struct bmc150_accel_data *data ->interrupts[i].info being
> > non-NULL, and which triggers NULL pointer dereference. This is triggered
> > e.g. from iio-sensor-proxy.
>
> Is the interrupt not wired up or is it just missing from the table?
Same Q I just asked :-)
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists