On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:31:37PM +0100, Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis) wrote:
> On 07.03.23 20:31, Pierre Asselin wrote:
> >> Maybe the following patch helps (on top of v6.3-rc1):
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/bus.c b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> index 9531dd0fef50..a5a8f82981ce 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/bus.c
> >> @@ -518,7 +518,7 @@ static void acpi_bus_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32
> >> type, void *data)
> >> if (!adev)
> >> goto err;
> >>
> >> - if (adev->dev.driver) {
> >> + if (device_is_bound(&adev->dev)) {
> >> struct acpi_driver *driver = to_acpi_driver(adev->dev.driver);
> >>
> >> if (driver && driver->ops.notify &&
> >>
> >
> > It does indeed "fix" 6.3-rc1. Modulo locking issues, which I am
> > not qualified to evaluate.
>
> Uwe, what happens to this regression fix? It looks like it didn't make
> any progress towards mainline, but maybe I missed something in my brief
> search on lore.
If you missed something then so did I. From my POV the patch is not
known to lead to a correct handling, but for sure it's better than the
status quo.
I didn't create a proper patch because I thought someone might want to
do a deeper dive and check the logging. If that doesn't happen, I can
followup with a patch.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
