From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: aisheng.dong@freescale.com (Dong Aisheng)
Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 17:09:22 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] pinctrl: fix pinmux_check_ops error checking
In-Reply-To: <4F8257F7.60302@st.com>
References: <1333714689-22450-1-git-send-email-b29396@freescale.com>
 <4F7F0C7E.6030407@wwwdotorg.org> <4F8257F7.60302@st.com>
Message-ID: <20120409090920.GA28029@shlinux2.ap.freescale.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 11:31:03AM +0800, Viresh Kumar wrote:
> On 4/6/2012 9:02 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> > On 04/06/2012 06:18 AM, Dong Aisheng wrote:
> >> > From: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@linaro.org>
> >> > 
> >> > Do not use get_functions_count before checking.
> >> > 
> >> > Signed-off-by: Dong Aisheng <dong.aisheng@linaro.org>
> > Acked-by: Stephen Warren <swarren@wwwdotorg.org>
> > 
> > IIRC, Viresh added some other get_*_count() functions in the same patch.
> > Do we need any more fixes similar to the this for those too?
> 
> Might not be required as this patch handles the pinmux_check_ops() routine.
> At other places ops is guaranteed to have correct value.
> 
Yes, core can guarantee it after pinmux_check_ops.
But i noticed for user interfaces, we may still need add some error checking
to avoid kernel oops like pinctrl_get_* and debugfs interfaces in case
the mux or config function is not supported by driver.
I'm going to send one more patch to fix it.

Regards
Dong Aisheng