3.6.11.9-rc1 stable review patch.
If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Wladislav Wiebe <wladislav.kw@xxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 9e40127526e857fa3f29d51e83277204fbdfc6ba ]
Already existing property flags are filled wrong for properties created from
initial FDT. This could cause problems if this DYNAMIC device-tree functions
are used later, i.e. properties are attached/detached/replaced. Simply dumping
flags from the running system show, that some initial static (not allocated via
kzmalloc()) nodes are marked as dynamic.
I putted some debug extensions to property_proc_show(..) :
..
+ if (OF_IS_DYNAMIC(pp))
+ pr_err("DEBUG: xxx : OF_IS_DYNAMIC\n");
+ if (OF_IS_DETACHED(pp))
+ pr_err("DEBUG: xxx : OF_IS_DETACHED\n");
when you operate on the nodes (e.g.: ~$ cat /proc/device-tree/*some_node*) you
will see that those flags are filled wrong, basically in most cases it will dump
a DYNAMIC or DETACHED status, which is in not true.
(BTW. this OF_IS_DETACHED is a own define for debug purposes which which just
make a test_bit(OF_DETACHED, &x->_flags)
If nodes are dynamic kernel is allowed to kfree() them. But it will crash
attempting to do so on the nodes from FDT -- they are not allocated via
kzmalloc().
Signed-off-by: Wladislav Wiebe <wladislav.kw@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverdlin@xxxxxxx>
Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Rob Herring <rob.herring@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/of/fdt.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/drivers/of/fdt.c b/drivers/of/fdt.c
index 91a375f..17fad3b 100644
--- a/drivers/of/fdt.c
+++ b/drivers/of/fdt.c
@@ -390,6 +390,8 @@ static void __unflatten_device_tree(struct boot_param_header *blob,
mem = (unsigned long)
dt_alloc(size + 4, __alignof__(struct device_node));
+ memset((void *)mem, 0, size);
+
((__be32 *)mem)[size / 4] = cpu_to_be32(0xdeadbeef);
pr_debug(" unflattening %lx...\n", mem);
--
1.7.10.4
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe stable" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html