Re: [PATCH v2] pinctrl-single: fix pcs_parse_pinconf() return value

[Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 2:51 PM Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> This patch causes pcs_parse_pinconf() to return -ENOTSUPP when no
> pinctrl_map is added.  The current behavior is to return 0 when
> !PCS_HAS_PINCONF or !nconfs.  Thus pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry()
> incorrectly assumes that a map was added and sets num_maps = 2.
>
> Analysis:
> =========
> The function pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry() calls pcs_parse_pinconf()
> if PCS_HAS_PINCONF is enabled.  The function pcs_parse_pinconf()
> returns 0 to indicate there was no error and num_maps is then set to 2:
>
>  980 static int pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry(struct pcs_device *pcs,
>  981                                                 struct device_node *np,
>  982                                                 struct pinctrl_map **map,
>  983                                                 unsigned *num_maps,
>  984                                                 const char **pgnames)
>  985 {
> <snip>
> 1053         (*map)->type = PIN_MAP_TYPE_MUX_GROUP;
> 1054         (*map)->data.mux.group = np->name;
> 1055         (*map)->data.mux.function = np->name;
> 1056
> 1057         if (PCS_HAS_PINCONF && function) {
> 1058                 res = pcs_parse_pinconf(pcs, np, function, map);
> 1059                 if (res)
> 1060                         goto free_pingroups;
> 1061                 *num_maps = 2;
> 1062         } else {
> 1063                 *num_maps = 1;
> 1064         }
>
> However, pcs_parse_pinconf() will also return 0 if !PCS_HAS_PINCONF or
> !nconfs.  I believe these conditions should indicate that no map was
> added by returning -ENOTSUPP. Otherwise pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry()
> will set num_maps = 2 even though no maps were successfully added, as
> it does not reach "m++" on line 940:
>
>  895 static int pcs_parse_pinconf(struct pcs_device *pcs, struct device_node *np,
>  896                              struct pcs_function *func,
>  897                              struct pinctrl_map **map)
>  898
>  899 {
>  900         struct pinctrl_map *m = *map;
> <snip>
>  917         /* If pinconf isn't supported, don't parse properties in below. */
>  918         if (!PCS_HAS_PINCONF)
>  919                 return 0;
>  920
>  921         /* cacluate how much properties are supported in current node */
>  922         for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(prop2); i++) {
>  923                 if (of_find_property(np, prop2[i].name, NULL))
>  924                         nconfs++;
>  925         }
>  926         for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(prop4); i++) {
>  927                 if (of_find_property(np, prop4[i].name, NULL))
>  928                         nconfs++;
>  929         }
>  930         if (!nconfs)
>  919                 return 0;
>  932
>  933         func->conf = devm_kcalloc(pcs->dev,
>  934                                   nconfs, sizeof(struct pcs_conf_vals),
>  935                                   GFP_KERNEL);
>  936         if (!func->conf)
>  937                 return -ENOMEM;
>  938         func->nconfs = nconfs;
>  939         conf = &(func->conf[0]);
>  940         m++;
>
> This situtation will cause a boot failure [0] on the BeagleBone Black
> (AM3358) when am33xx_pinmux node in arch/arm/boot/dts/am33xx-l4.dtsi
> has compatible = "pinconf-single" instead of "pinctrl-single".
>
> The patch fixes this issue by returning -ENOSUPP when !PCS_HAS_PINCONF
> or !nconfs, so that pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry() will know that no
> map was added.
>
> Logic is also added to pcs_parse_one_pinctrl_entry() to distinguish
> between -ENOSUPP and other errors.  In the case of -ENOSUPP, num_maps
> is set to 1 as it is valid for pinconf to be enabled and a given pin
> group to not any pinconf properties.
>
> [0] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-omap/20200529175544.GA3766151@x1/
>
> Fixes: 9dddb4df90d1 ("pinctrl: single: support generic pinconf")
> Signed-off-by: Drew Fustini <drew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Patch applied as non-critical (for-next) fix.

If there is no hurry let's merge it this way with lots of testing
along the way.

Yours,
Linus Walleij