Re: [PATCH] tpm,tpm_tis: Avoid warning splat at shutdown

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Dear Jarkko,


Am 07.03.24 um 21:05 schrieb Jarkko Sakkinen:
On Tue Mar 5, 2024 at 5:43 PM EET, Paul Menzel wrote:

Am 01.02.24 um 12:36 schrieb Lino Sanfilippo:
If interrupts are not activated the work struct 'free_irq_work' is not
initialized. This results in a warning splat at module shutdown.

Fix this by always initializing the work regardless of whether interrupts
are activated or not.

cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fixes: 481c2d14627d ("tpm,tpm_tis: Disable interrupts after 1000 unhandled IRQs")
Reported-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/CX32RFOMJUQ0.3R4YCL9MDCB96@xxxxxxxxxx/
Signed-off-by: Lino Sanfilippo <l.sanfilippo@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
   drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 3 +--
   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
index 1b350412d8a6..64c875657687 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c
@@ -919,8 +919,6 @@ static int tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 intmask,
   	int rc;
   	u32 int_status;
- INIT_WORK(&priv->free_irq_work, tpm_tis_free_irq_func);
-
   	rc = devm_request_threaded_irq(chip->dev.parent, irq, NULL,
   				       tis_int_handler, IRQF_ONESHOT | flags,
   				       dev_name(&chip->dev), chip);
@@ -1132,6 +1130,7 @@ int tpm_tis_core_init(struct device *dev, struct tpm_tis_data *priv, int irq,
   	priv->phy_ops = phy_ops;
   	priv->locality_count = 0;
   	mutex_init(&priv->locality_count_mutex);
+	INIT_WORK(&priv->free_irq_work, tpm_tis_free_irq_func);
dev_set_drvdata(&chip->dev, priv);

This is commit d6fb14208e22 in jarkko/next.

I tested this patch on top of Linux 6.8-rc7 on a Dell OptiPlex 5055 [1]
and it fixes the issue there too.

Thanks!

If you don't mind I'll add your tested-by to the commit before I send
my next pull request to Linus?

Sure, go ahead. I thought, it’s not going to be amended, and therefore didn’t add the tag.

Tested-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Kind regards,

Paul




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Kernel Hardening]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux