The commit 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") introduces the possibility to use the supplier's parent device instead of the supplier itself. In that case the supplier fwnode used is not updated and is no more consistent with the supplier device used.
Use the fwnode consistent with the supplier device when checking flags.
Fixes: 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com --- Changes v2 -> v3: Do not update the supplier handle in order to keep the original handle for debug traces.
Changes v1 -> v2: Remove sup_handle check and related pr_debug() call as sup_handle cannot be invalid if sup_dev is valid.
drivers/base/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c index 4d8b315c48a1..440b52ec027f 100644 --- a/drivers/base/core.c +++ b/drivers/base/core.c @@ -2082,7 +2082,7 @@ static int fw_devlink_create_devlink(struct device *con, * supplier device indefinitely. */ if (sup_dev->links.status == DL_DEV_NO_DRIVER && - sup_handle->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) { + sup_dev->fwnode->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) { dev_dbg(con, "Not linking %pfwf - dev might never probe\n", sup_handle);
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 08:46:32AM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
The commit 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") introduces the possibility to use the supplier's parent device instead of the supplier itself. In that case the supplier fwnode used is not updated and is no more consistent with the supplier device used.
Use the fwnode consistent with the supplier device when checking flags.
Fixes: 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com
Changes v2 -> v3: Do not update the supplier handle in order to keep the original handle for debug traces.
Changes v1 -> v2: Remove sup_handle check and related pr_debug() call as sup_handle cannot be invalid if sup_dev is valid.
drivers/base/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c index 4d8b315c48a1..440b52ec027f 100644 --- a/drivers/base/core.c +++ b/drivers/base/core.c @@ -2082,7 +2082,7 @@ static int fw_devlink_create_devlink(struct device *con, * supplier device indefinitely. */ if (sup_dev->links.status == DL_DEV_NO_DRIVER &&
sup_handle->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) {
sup_dev->fwnode->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) { dev_dbg(con, "Not linking %pfwf - dev might never probe\n", sup_handle);-- 2.41.0
Is this still needed? If so, how come no one is noticing it?
thanks,
greg k-h
Hi Greg,
On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 16:39:49 +0100 Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 08:46:32AM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
The commit 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") introduces the possibility to use the supplier's parent device instead of the supplier itself. In that case the supplier fwnode used is not updated and is no more consistent with the supplier device used.
Use the fwnode consistent with the supplier device when checking flags.
Fixes: 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com
Changes v2 -> v3: Do not update the supplier handle in order to keep the original handle for debug traces.
Changes v1 -> v2: Remove sup_handle check and related pr_debug() call as sup_handle cannot be invalid if sup_dev is valid.
drivers/base/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c index 4d8b315c48a1..440b52ec027f 100644 --- a/drivers/base/core.c +++ b/drivers/base/core.c @@ -2082,7 +2082,7 @@ static int fw_devlink_create_devlink(struct device *con, * supplier device indefinitely. */ if (sup_dev->links.status == DL_DEV_NO_DRIVER &&
sup_handle->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) {
sup_dev->fwnode->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) { dev_dbg(con, "Not linking %pfwf - dev might never probe\n", sup_handle);-- 2.41.0
Is this still needed? If so, how come no one is noticing it?
I think it is. At least, I don't see anything that make this patch obsolete.
Hervé
Hi Saravana,
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 14:23:02 +0100 Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com wrote:
Hi Greg,
On Thu, 4 Jan 2024 16:39:49 +0100 Greg Kroah-Hartman gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
On Tue, Nov 14, 2023 at 08:46:32AM +0100, Herve Codina wrote:
The commit 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") introduces the possibility to use the supplier's parent device instead of the supplier itself. In that case the supplier fwnode used is not updated and is no more consistent with the supplier device used.
Use the fwnode consistent with the supplier device when checking flags.
Fixes: 3a2dbc510c43 ("driver core: fw_devlink: Don't purge child fwnode's consumer links") Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Herve Codina herve.codina@bootlin.com
Changes v2 -> v3: Do not update the supplier handle in order to keep the original handle for debug traces.
Changes v1 -> v2: Remove sup_handle check and related pr_debug() call as sup_handle cannot be invalid if sup_dev is valid.
drivers/base/core.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/base/core.c b/drivers/base/core.c index 4d8b315c48a1..440b52ec027f 100644 --- a/drivers/base/core.c +++ b/drivers/base/core.c @@ -2082,7 +2082,7 @@ static int fw_devlink_create_devlink(struct device *con, * supplier device indefinitely. */ if (sup_dev->links.status == DL_DEV_NO_DRIVER &&
sup_handle->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) {
sup_dev->fwnode->flags & FWNODE_FLAG_INITIALIZED) { dev_dbg(con, "Not linking %pfwf - dev might never probe\n", sup_handle);-- 2.41.0
Is this still needed? If so, how come no one is noticing it?
I think it is. At least, I don't see anything that make this patch obsolete.
Any opinion about this patch ?
Best regards, Hervé
linux-stable-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Greg Kroah-Hartman -
Herve Codina