On 29.05.2024 14:26, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
> On Wed May 29, 2024 at 10:47 AM EEST, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Has this possibly fallen through the cracks?
>
> Not possibly that is what exactly has happened, sorry.
>
> I tweaked a bit the commit message:
>
> commit 2c0943eba0bd765e1e4a90234e669a26a9304b74 (HEAD -> master)
> Author: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Wed May 29 15:23:25 2024 +0300
>
> tpm_tis: Do *not* flush uninitialized work
>
> tpm_tis_core_init() may fail before tpm_tis_probe_irq_single() is
> called, in which case tpm_tis_remove() unconditionally calling
> flush_work() is triggering a warning for .func still being NULL.
>
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # v6.5+
> Fixes: 481c2d14627d ("tpm,tpm_tis: Disable interrupts after 1000 unhandled IRQs")
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Does this make sense to you?
Sure, that's entirely up to you.
Jan
