2010-08-07 00:13:12

by Patrick Pannuto

Subject: [PATCH] platform: Use drv->driver.bus instead of assuming platform_bus_type

In theory (although not *yet* in practice), a driver being passed
to platform_driver_probe might have driver.bus set to something
other than platform_bus_type. Locking drv->driver.bus is always
correct.

Signed-off-by: Patrick Pannuto <[email protected]>
---
drivers/base/platform.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
index c6c933f..579906f 100644
--- a/drivers/base/platform.c
+++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
@@ -488,12 +488,12 @@ int __init_or_module platform_driver_probe(struct platform_driver *drv,
* if the probe was successful, and make sure any forced probes of
* new devices fail.
*/
- spin_lock(&platform_bus_type.p->klist_drivers.k_lock);
+ spin_lock(&drv->driver.bus->p->klist_drivers.k_lock);
drv->probe = NULL;
if (code == 0 && list_empty(&drv->driver.p->klist_devices.k_list))
retval = -ENODEV;
drv->driver.probe = platform_drv_probe_fail;
- spin_unlock(&platform_bus_type.p->klist_drivers.k_lock);
+ spin_unlock(&drv->driver.bus->p->klist_drivers.k_lock);

if (code != retval)
platform_driver_unregister(drv);
--
1.7.2

2010-08-07 00:33:56

by Greg KH

Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: Use drv->driver.bus instead of assuming platform_bus_type

On Fri, Aug 06, 2010 at 05:12:41PM -0700, Patrick Pannuto wrote:
> In theory (although not *yet* in practice), a driver being passed
> to platform_driver_probe might have driver.bus set to something
> other than platform_bus_type. Locking drv->driver.bus is always
> correct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Pannuto <[email protected]>

Thanks, I'll queue this up after the .36 merge window is over in my
tree.

greg k-h