On 06/17/2013 09:07 PM, Stephen Warren wrote:
> On 06/17/2013 11:47 AM, Tuomas Tynkkynen wrote:
>> Commit "i2c: core: make it possible to match a pure device tree driver"
>> changed semantics of the i2c probing for device tree devices.
>> Device tree probed devices now get a NULL i2c_device_id pointer.
>> This caused kernel panics due to NULL dereference.
>
>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c b/drivers/mfd/tps65910.c
>
>> pmic_plat_data = dev_get_platdata(&i2c->dev);
>>
>> - if (!pmic_plat_data && i2c->dev.of_node) {
>> + if (id) {
>> + chip_id = id->driver_data;
>> + } else if (i2c->dev.of_node) {
>> pmic_plat_data = tps65910_parse_dt(i2c, &chip_id);
>
> That over-writes pmic_plat_data even if it was already set above. This
> should really only happen if the earlier assignment didn't find any
> pdata, i.e. if (!pmic_plat_data) here.
That would cause the probe() to fail since it doesn't have a chip_id.
>
> Looking at patch 2/2, the structure in that driver is correct, and
> perhaps could be implemented the same or similarly here?
>
This seems to be the best way, I'll change it that way.
>> of_pmic_plat_data = pmic_plat_data;
>
> Or just swap those assignments:
>
> of_pmic_plat_data = tps65910_parse_dt(...);
> if (!pmic_plat_data)
> pmic_plat_data = of_pmic_plat_data;
>
> (although there's perhaps little point parsing the pdata from DT if it's
> already provided through the device object)
Yeah, especially since tps65910_parse_dt can dev_warn().
>
>> }
>>
>> - if (!pmic_plat_data)
>> + if (!pmic_plat_data || chip_id < 0)
>> return -EINVAL;
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-i2c" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
