The Linux Kernel Mailing List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Christian Eggers <ceggers@arri.de>
To: Doug Anderson <dianders@chromium.org>
Cc: Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@gmail.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	<stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: dummy: force synchronous probing
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 08:36:45 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4942246.OV4Wx5bFTl@n9w6sw14> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAD=FV=UBUN+DERvSdZn67FUvyT+U_CNJs0HUdHooSZSK2F6Nsw@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Doug,

On Thursday, 13 March 2025, 01:42:14 CET, Doug Anderson wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Mar 11, 2025 at 2:18 AM Christian Eggers <ceggers@arri.de> wrote:
> >
> > Sometimes I get a NULL pointer dereference at boot time in kobject_get()
> > with the following call stack:
> >
> > anatop_regulator_probe()
> >  devm_regulator_register()
> >   regulator_register()
> >    regulator_resolve_supply()
> >     kobject_get()
> >
> > By placing some extra BUG_ON() statements I could verify that this is
> > raised because probing of the 'dummy' regulator driver is not completed
> > ('dummy_regulator_rdev' is still NULL).
> >
> > In the JTAG debugger I can see that dummy_regulator_probe() and
> > anatop_regulator_probe() can be run by different kernel threads
> > (kworker/u4:*).  I haven't further investigated whether this can be
> > changed or if there are other possibilities to force synchronization
> > between these two probe routines.  On the other hand I don't expect much
> > boot time penalty by probing the 'dummy' regulator synchronously.
> >
> > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> > Fixes: 259b93b21a9f ("regulator: Set PROBE_PREFER_ASYNCHRONOUS for drivers that existed in 4.14")
> > Signed-off-by: Christian Eggers <ceggers@arri.de>
> > ---
> > v2:
> > - no changes
> >
> >  drivers/regulator/dummy.c | 2 +-
> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> Not that it should really hurt, but do we need both commit
> cfaf53cb472e ("regulator: check that dummy regulator has been probed
> before using it") and this one? It seems like commit cfaf53cb472e
> ("regulator: check that dummy regulator has been probed before using
> it") would be sufficient and we don't really need to force the
> regulator to synchronous probing.

actually I also tested successfully without synchronous probing (only with checking
that the dummy regulator has been probed) and this also worked fine (just to
be sure, I also added a temporary delay in the dummy's probe routine).  But as
the dummy regulator doesn't rely on slow I/O, I felt that synchronous probing
makes more sense than "busy-waiting" for it.

> 
> ...not that I expect the dummy probing synchronously to be a big deal,
> I just want to make sure I understand.
> 
> -Doug
> 

regards,
Christian




      reply	other threads:[~2025-03-13  7:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-03-11  9:18 [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: dummy: force synchronous probing Christian Eggers
2025-03-11  9:18 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] regulator: check that dummy regulator has been probed before using it Christian Eggers
2025-03-13  0:46   ` Doug Anderson
2025-03-13  7:40     ` Christian Eggers
2025-03-11 19:17 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] regulator: dummy: force synchronous probing Mark Brown
2025-03-13  0:42 ` Doug Anderson
2025-03-13  7:36   ` Christian Eggers [this message]

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=4942246.OV4Wx5bFTl@n9w6sw14 \
    --to=ceggers@arri.de \
    --cc=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=dianders@chromium.org \
    --cc=lgirdwood@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox