[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFZ_YJH30f1WDneD@wunner.de>
Date: Sat, 21 Jun 2025 11:46:08 +0200
From: Lukas Wunner <lukas@...ner.de>
To: Ahmed Salem <x0rw3ll@...il.com>
Cc: airlied@...hat.com, dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] amd64-agp: do not bind to pci driver if probing fails
On Sat, Jun 21, 2025 at 04:55:52AM +0300, Ahmed Salem wrote:
> --- a/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c
> +++ b/drivers/char/agp/amd64-agp.c
> @@ -768,10 +768,15 @@ int __init agp_amd64_init(void)
>
> /* Look for any AGP bridge */
> agp_amd64_pci_driver.id_table = agp_amd64_pci_promisc_table;
> - err = driver_attach(&agp_amd64_pci_driver.driver);
> - if (err == 0 && agp_bridges_found == 0) {
> + if ((int *)agp_amd64_pci_driver.probe != 0) {
> pci_unregister_driver(&agp_amd64_pci_driver);
> err = -ENODEV;
> + } else {
> + err = driver_attach(&agp_amd64_pci_driver.driver);
> + if (err == 0 && agp_bridges_found == 0) {
> + pci_unregister_driver(&agp_amd64_pci_driver);
> + err = -ENODEV;
> + }
Is the "probe" member in agp_amd64_pci_driver overwritten with a
zero pointer anywhere? I don't see that it is, so it seems the
else-branch is never entered.
I had already prepared a fix for this, but waited for 0-day to
crunch through it. I've just submitted it, so that's what I had
in mind:
https://lore.kernel.org/r/f8ff40f35a9a5836d1371f60e85c09c5735e3c5e.1750497201.git.lukas@wunner.de/
Thanks,
Lukas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists