Hi Hans, Adrian,
On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 18:23:56 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Calling acpi_device_fix_up_power() on a device which is not present
> is not a good idea.
How bad is it?
This was introduced by commit e5bbf30733f9, which was backported to
several stable branches. If it causes real trouble then this fix-up
patch should be annotated with
Fixes: e5bbf30733f9 ("mmc: sdhci-acpi: Ensure connected devices are powered when")
and Cc's to stable@, so it can be propagated to all affected trees.
> While at it also call acpi_bus_get_status() on the children before
> the status check to make sure that child->status contains valid data.
>
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c | 6 +++---
> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> index 96465ff..873beae 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> @@ -394,15 +394,15 @@ static int sdhci_acpi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device))
> return -ENODEV;
>
> + if (acpi_bus_get_status(device) || !device->status.present)
> + return -ENODEV;
> +
> /* Power on the SDHCI controller and its children */
> acpi_device_fix_up_power(device);
> list_for_each_entry(child, &device->children, node)
> if (child->status.present && child->status.enabled)
> acpi_device_fix_up_power(child);
>
> - if (acpi_bus_get_status(device) || !device->status.present)
> - return -ENODEV;
> -
> if (sdhci_acpi_byt_defer(dev))
> return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>
--
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
