Hi, On 03.02.21 02:17, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Tue, Feb 02, 2021 at 11:09:03PM +0100, Lino Sanfilippo wrote: >> From: Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@xxxxxxxxxx> >> >> In tpm2_del_space() the sessions are flushed by means of the tpm_chip >> operations. However the concerning operations pointer my already be NULL at > ~~ > may > > What is "concerniog operations"? Unfamiliar term. Maybe just consistently > se chip->ops? Now you have also "tpm_chip operations" and chip->ops, in > addition to "concerning operations" in one paragraph commit message. 'concerning' referred to 'operations pointer'. But yes, using multiple times a different term for the same thing is quite confusing. I will fix this. >> this time in case that the chip has been unregistered (see >> tpm_chip_unregister() which calls tpm_del_char_device() which sets >> chip->ops to NULL). >> Before accessing chip->ops check if it is still valid. Skip flushing >> the sessions in this case. >> >> Signed-off-by: Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > Instead of cross referencing please describe the scenario (i.e. > the sequence of operations) of failure. > > Fixes tag is also missing. > Right, will add it. Thanks, Lino
