From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Cc: dmaengine <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Subject: [v1,1/4] ACPI / bus: Remove checks in acpi_get_match_data()
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 14:24:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1517487893.7000.1372.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 08:27 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
> wrote:
> > On 1/31/2018 4:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > As well as its sibling of_device_get_match_data() has no such
> > > checks,
> > > no need to do it in acpi_get_match_data().
> > >
> > > First of all, we are not supposed to call fwnode API like this
> > > without
> > > driver attached.
> > >
> > > Second, if pure OF driver calls this function, it's weird to have
> > > ACPI
> > > companion without ACPI ID in this case.
> >
> > We talked about this during review.
> >
> > of_match_device() does all the checking for the OF part. ACPI
> > doesn't have
> > any checks.
>
> Yeah, this patch is just plain incorrect AFAICS.
I don't see how check dev->driver is implemented on OF side then
of_device_get_match_data() which is called by
of_fwnode_device_get_match_data() has dereferenced dev->driver w/o any
check.
I can't agree that the patch is plain incorrect, if I didn't miss
anything.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
To: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
Cc: dmaengine <dmaengine@vger.kernel.org>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@rjwysocki.net>,
ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org>,
Sakari Ailus <sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com>,
Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/4] ACPI / bus: Remove checks in acpi_get_match_data()
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2018 14:24:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1517487893.7000.1372.camel@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAJZ5v0i_wZCmPcMSqGWNpxAStkw0UVhrDNUdaEiDY90=uEjGcw@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2018-02-01 at 08:27 +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@codeaurora.org>
> wrote:
> > On 1/31/2018 4:29 PM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > > As well as its sibling of_device_get_match_data() has no such
> > > checks,
> > > no need to do it in acpi_get_match_data().
> > >
> > > First of all, we are not supposed to call fwnode API like this
> > > without
> > > driver attached.
> > >
> > > Second, if pure OF driver calls this function, it's weird to have
> > > ACPI
> > > companion without ACPI ID in this case.
> >
> > We talked about this during review.
> >
> > of_match_device() does all the checking for the OF part. ACPI
> > doesn't have
> > any checks.
>
> Yeah, this patch is just plain incorrect AFAICS.
I don't see how check dev->driver is implemented on OF side then
of_device_get_match_data() which is called by
of_fwnode_device_get_match_data() has dereferenced dev->driver w/o any
check.
I can't agree that the patch is plain incorrect, if I didn't miss
anything.
--
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
Intel Finland Oy
next reply other threads:[~2018-02-01 12:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-01 12:24 Andy Shevchenko [this message]
2018-02-01 12:24 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] ACPI / bus: Remove checks in acpi_get_match_data() Andy Shevchenko
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-02-03 17:16 [v1,3/4] dmaengine: hidma: Constify returned by device_get_match_data() value kbuild test robot
2018-02-03 17:16 ` [PATCH v1 3/4] " kbuild test robot
2018-02-02 11:32 [v1,1/4] ACPI / bus: Remove checks in acpi_get_match_data() Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-02-02 11:32 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-02-01 12:58 [v1,1/4] " Sinan Kaya
2018-02-01 12:58 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] " okaya
2018-02-01 7:27 [v1,1/4] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-02-01 7:27 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] " Rafael J. Wysocki
2018-01-31 22:17 [v1,1/4] " Sinan Kaya
2018-01-31 22:17 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] " Sinan Kaya
2018-01-31 21:29 [v1,4/4] device property: Constify device_get_match_data() Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 ` [PATCH v1 4/4] " Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 [v1,3/4] dmaengine: hidma: Constify returned by device_get_match_data() value Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 ` [PATCH v1 3/4] " Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 [v1,2/4] ACPI / bus: Rename acpi_get_match_data() to acpi_device_get_match_data() Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 ` [PATCH v1 2/4] " Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 [v1,1/4] ACPI / bus: Remove checks in acpi_get_match_data() Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:29 ` [PATCH v1 1/4] " Andy Shevchenko
2018-01-31 21:27 [v1,1/4] " Andy Shevchenko
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1517487893.7000.1372.camel@linux.intel.com \
--to=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dmaengine@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=okaya@codeaurora.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@rjwysocki.net \
--cc=sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vinod.koul@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.