On 12/16/2016 04:52 PM, Prakash, Prashanth wrote:
> Hi Boris,
>
> On 12/16/2016 11:35 AM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> If acpi_cppc_processor_probe() had not executed successfully (for
>> example, if _CPC object was not found) then cpc_desc_ptr for that
>> processor will be invalid.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c | 2 ++
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> index d0d0504..5bba26e 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/cppc_acpi.c
>> @@ -824,6 +824,8 @@ void acpi_cppc_processor_exit(struct acpi_processor *pr)
>> void __iomem *addr;
>>
>> cpc_ptr = per_cpu(cpc_desc_ptr, pr->id);
>> + if (!cpc_ptr)
>> + return;
>>
>> /* Free all the mapped sys mem areas for this CPU */
>> for (i = 2; i < cpc_ptr->num_entries; i++) {
> I think a recent patch from Sebastian fixed the same issue.
> https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/rafael/linux-pm.git/commit/?h=bleeding-edge&id=9e9d68dad58c70f40f50adfeabd2fdaa39a743fd
Ah, excellent! Thanks.
-boris
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
