On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 at 08:50, Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > The code unconditionally calls host->ops->busy_complete() > if we get a busy response and the variant supports busy > detection (variant->busy_detect = true). > > However there are several STM32 variants that define > variant->busy_detect to true but do not define any > busy_complete() callback. This looks like a recepie for > a NULL pointer exception. This isn't correct, as things would have exploded by now. :-) > > Check that the callback is valid before calling it. > > Signed-off-by: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > index b9e5dfe74e5c..bc150c0d5eed 100644 > --- a/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/mmci.c > @@ -1381,7 +1381,7 @@ mmci_cmd_irq(struct mmci_host *host, struct mmc_command *cmd, > return; > > /* Handle busy detection on DAT0 if the variant supports it. */ > - if (busy_resp && host->variant->busy_detect) > + if (busy_resp && host->variant->busy_detect && host->ops->busy_complete) > if (!host->ops->busy_complete(host, status, err_msk)) > return; All variants that have the .busy_detect flags set, need to assign the ->busy_complete() callback too. To me it seems a bit silly, to check for a mandatory callback, although if you prefer it, then I suggest we do it during ->probe() instead. Kind regards Uffe
