[PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin]

__mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.

Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.

Signed-off-by: Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin <dev-josejavier.rodriguez@duagon.com>
---
 drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c | 9 +++++----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
index c1367223e71a..3d487d75c483 100644
--- a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
+++ b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
@@ -85,7 +85,8 @@ static void mcb_remove(struct device *dev)
 	struct mcb_device *mdev = to_mcb_device(dev);
 	struct module *carrier_mod;
 
-	mdrv->remove(mdev);
+	if (mdrv->remove)
+		mdrv->remove(mdev);
 
 	carrier_mod = mdev->dev.parent->driver->owner;
 	module_put(carrier_mod);
@@ -176,13 +177,13 @@ static const struct device_type mcb_carrier_device_type = {
  * @owner: The @mcb_driver's module
  * @mod_name: The name of the @mcb_driver's module
  *
- * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform some sanity checks, if
- * the .probe and .remove methods are provided by the driver.
+ * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform a sanity check, if
+ * .probe method is provided by the driver.
  */
 int __mcb_register_driver(struct mcb_driver *drv, struct module *owner,
 			const char *mod_name)
 {
-	if (!drv->probe || !drv->remove)
+	if (!drv->probe)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
 	drv->driver.owner = owner;
-- 
2.51.1

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Johannes Thumshirn]

On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
> mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
>
> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.

The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is 
gpio-menz127.c.

Is this safe?


>
> Signed-off-by: Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin <dev-josejavier.rodriguez@duagon.com>
> ---
>   drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c | 9 +++++----
>   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> index c1367223e71a..3d487d75c483 100644
> --- a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> +++ b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> @@ -85,7 +85,8 @@ static void mcb_remove(struct device *dev)
>   	struct mcb_device *mdev = to_mcb_device(dev);
>   	struct module *carrier_mod;
>   
> -	mdrv->remove(mdev);
> +	if (mdrv->remove)
> +		mdrv->remove(mdev);
>   
>   	carrier_mod = mdev->dev.parent->driver->owner;
>   	module_put(carrier_mod);
> @@ -176,13 +177,13 @@ static const struct device_type mcb_carrier_device_type = {
>    * @owner: The @mcb_driver's module
>    * @mod_name: The name of the @mcb_driver's module
>    *
> - * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform some sanity checks, if
> - * the .probe and .remove methods are provided by the driver.
> + * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform a sanity check, if
> + * .probe method is provided by the driver.
>    */
>   int __mcb_register_driver(struct mcb_driver *drv, struct module *owner,
>   			const char *mod_name)
>   {
> -	if (!drv->probe || !drv->remove)
> +	if (!drv->probe)
>   		return -EINVAL;
>   
>   	drv->driver.owner = owner;

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> > to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
> > mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
> > 
> > Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> 
> The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
> gpio-menz127.c.

Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in

3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")

The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.

> 
> Is this safe?
> 

From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
from the bus.

I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?

The other possible approach is to adding an empty .remove method on gpio-menz127 but
I guess this is not the best way of fixing this.

Regards,

Javier R.

> 
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin <dev-josejavier.rodriguez@duagon.com>
> > ---
> >   drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c | 9 +++++----
> >   1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> > index c1367223e71a..3d487d75c483 100644
> > --- a/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> > +++ b/drivers/mcb/mcb-core.c
> > @@ -85,7 +85,8 @@ static void mcb_remove(struct device *dev)
> >   	struct mcb_device *mdev = to_mcb_device(dev);
> >   	struct module *carrier_mod;
> > -	mdrv->remove(mdev);
> > +	if (mdrv->remove)
> > +		mdrv->remove(mdev);
> >   	carrier_mod = mdev->dev.parent->driver->owner;
> >   	module_put(carrier_mod);
> > @@ -176,13 +177,13 @@ static const struct device_type mcb_carrier_device_type = {
> >    * @owner: The @mcb_driver's module
> >    * @mod_name: The name of the @mcb_driver's module
> >    *
> > - * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform some sanity checks, if
> > - * the .probe and .remove methods are provided by the driver.
> > + * Register a @mcb_driver at the system. Perform a sanity check, if
> > + * .probe method is provided by the driver.
> >    */
> >   int __mcb_register_driver(struct mcb_driver *drv, struct module *owner,
> >   			const char *mod_name)
> >   {
> > -	if (!drv->probe || !drv->remove)
> > +	if (!drv->probe)
> >   		return -EINVAL;
> >   	drv->driver.owner = owner;
> 
> 

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Johannes Thumshirn]

On 11/21/25 11:33 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
>>> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
>>> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
>>> mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
>>>
>>> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
>> The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
>> gpio-menz127.c.
> Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in
>
> 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
>
> The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.
>
>> Is this safe?
>>
>  From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
> of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
> from the bus.
>
> I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
> not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?


Thanks this is the information I was missing from the changelog. I'll 
change the commit message to:

__mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, since commit
3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
removed the .remove callback from menz127-gpio.c, not all mcb device
drivers implement .remove callback.

Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.

I'll also add

Fixes: 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")


Thanks,

     Johannes

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:54:08AM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 11/21/25 11:33 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > > On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > > > __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> > > > to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
> > > > mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
> > > > 
> > > > Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> > > The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
> > > gpio-menz127.c.
> > Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in
> > 
> > 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> > 
> > The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.
> > 
> > > Is this safe?
> > > 
> >  From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
> > of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
> > from the bus.
> > 
> > I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
> > not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?
> 
> 
> Thanks this is the information I was missing from the changelog. I'll change
> the commit message to:
> 
> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, since commit
> 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> removed the .remove callback from menz127-gpio.c, not all mcb device
> drivers implement .remove callback.
> 
> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> 
> I'll also add
> 
> Fixes: 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>     Johannes
> 

Hi Johannes,

It is OK to me.

Thank you so much.

	Javier R.

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin]

On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:54:08AM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 11/21/25 11:33 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > > On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > > > __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> > > > to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
> > > > mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
> > > > 
> > > > Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> > > The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
> > > gpio-menz127.c.
> > Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in
> > 
> > 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> > 
> > The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.
> > 
> > > Is this safe?
> > > 
> >  From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
> > of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
> > from the bus.
> > 
> > I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
> > not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?
> 
> 
> Thanks this is the information I was missing from the changelog. I'll change
> the commit message to:
> 
> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, since commit
> 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> removed the .remove callback from menz127-gpio.c, not all mcb device
> drivers implement .remove callback.
> 
> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> 
> I'll also add
> 
> Fixes: 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
>     Johannes
> 

Hi Johannes,

I noticed this patch is not uploaded yet.

I can submit it again changing the commit message as you commented above.

Thank you,

Javier R.

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Johannes Thumshirn]

On 1/16/26 11:30 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:54:08AM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>> On 11/21/25 11:33 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
>>>> On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
>>>>> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
>>>>> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
>>>>> mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
>>>>>
>>>>> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
>>>> The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
>>>> gpio-menz127.c.
>>> Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in
>>>
>>> 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
>>>
>>> The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.
>>>
>>>> Is this safe?
>>>>
>>>   From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
>>> of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
>>> from the bus.
>>>
>>> I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
>>> not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?
>>
>> Thanks this is the information I was missing from the changelog. I'll change
>> the commit message to:
>>
>> __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
>> to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, since commit
>> 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
>> removed the .remove callback from menz127-gpio.c, not all mcb device
>> drivers implement .remove callback.
>>
>> Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
>>
>> I'll also add
>>
>> Fixes: 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>      Johannes
>>
> Hi Johannes,
>
> I noticed this patch is not uploaded yet.
>
> I can submit it again changing the commit message as you commented above.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Javier R.

Yes I wanted to forward it to Greg and then I forgot I'm sorry. But I 
think it's still in time for v6.20. I'll do so ASAP.

Re: [PATCH] mcb: Fix incorrect sanity check

[Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin]

On Fri, Jan 16, 2026 at 11:33:02AM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> On 1/16/26 11:30 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 11:54:08AM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > > On 11/21/25 11:33 AM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 12:48:45PM +0100, Johannes Thumshirn wrote:
> > > > > On 11/20/25 12:37 PM, Jose Javier Rodriguez Barbarin wrote:
> > > > > > __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> > > > > > to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, not all
> > > > > > mcb device drivers implement .remove callback.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> > > > > The only driver I can see that doesn't implement a .remove method is
> > > > > gpio-menz127.c.
> > > > Yes. In the past gpio-menz127.c also implemented .remove method, however in
> > > > 
> > > > 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> > > > 
> > > > The driver changed, using now devm_* functions so .remove was no longer necessary.
> > > > 
> > > > > Is this safe?
> > > > > 
> > > >   From the point of view of mcb bus it should be safe becase I protected the call
> > > > of .remove on mcb_remove(), preventing possible crashes when the driver is removed
> > > > from the bus.
> > > > 
> > > > I'm afraid I'm lossing something because I cannot understand why these changes are or
> > > > not safe. Could you explain me why you understand that these changes are unsafe?
> > > 
> > > Thanks this is the information I was missing from the changelog. I'll change
> > > the commit message to:
> > > 
> > > __mcb_register_driver() makes some sanity checks over mcb_driver
> > > to check if .probe and .remove callbacks are set. However, since commit
> > > 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> > > removed the .remove callback from menz127-gpio.c, not all mcb device
> > > drivers implement .remove callback.
> > > 
> > > Remove .remove check to ensure all mcb device drivers can be loaded.
> > > 
> > > I'll also add
> > > 
> > > Fixes: 3bd13ae04ccc ("gpio: menz127: simplify error path and remove remove()")
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > 
> > >      Johannes
> > > 
> > Hi Johannes,
> > 
> > I noticed this patch is not uploaded yet.
> > 
> > I can submit it again changing the commit message as you commented above.
> > 
> > Thank you,
> > 
> > Javier R.
> 
> Yes I wanted to forward it to Greg and then I forgot I'm sorry. But I think
> it's still in time for v6.20. I'll do so ASAP.
> 

No problem, it is OK for me.

Thank you so much.

Javier R.