In commit e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support"), error
pointers to optional clocks were replaced by NULL to simplify the resume
callback implementation. However, that commit missed that the IS_ERR
check in mv64xxx_of_config should be replaced with a NULL check. As a
result, the check always passes, even for an invalid device tree.
Fixes: e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support")
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Samuel Holland <[email protected]>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
index b03c344323d1..c590d36b5fd1 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-mv64xxx.c
@@ -813,7 +813,7 @@ mv64xxx_of_config(struct mv64xxx_i2c_data *drv_data,
* need to know tclk in order to calculate bus clock
* factors.
*/
- if (IS_ERR(drv_data->clk)) {
+ if (!drv_data->clk) {
rc = -ENODEV;
goto out;
}
--
2.26.2
On 2/8/21 12:28 AM, Samuel Holland wrote:
> In commit e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support"), error
> pointers to optional clocks were replaced by NULL to simplify the resume
> callback implementation. However, that commit missed that the IS_ERR
> check in mv64xxx_of_config should be replaced with a NULL check. As a
> result, the check always passes, even for an invalid device tree.
Sorry, please ignore this unrelated patch. I accidentally copied it to
the wrong directory before sending this series.
Samuel
On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 12:31:34AM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote:
> On 2/8/21 12:28 AM, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > In commit e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support"), error
> > pointers to optional clocks were replaced by NULL to simplify the resume
> > callback implementation. However, that commit missed that the IS_ERR
> > check in mv64xxx_of_config should be replaced with a NULL check. As a
> > result, the check always passes, even for an invalid device tree.
>
> Sorry, please ignore this unrelated patch. I accidentally copied it to
> the wrong directory before sending this series.
Hi Samuel
This patch looks correct. But i don't see it in i2c/for-next, where as
e5c02cf54154 is. I just want to make sure it does not get lost...
Andrew
On Mon, 8 Feb 2021 00:31:34 -0600 Samuel Holland wrote:
> On 2/8/21 12:28 AM, Samuel Holland wrote:
> > In commit e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support"), error
> > pointers to optional clocks were replaced by NULL to simplify the resume
> > callback implementation. However, that commit missed that the IS_ERR
> > check in mv64xxx_of_config should be replaced with a NULL check. As a
> > result, the check always passes, even for an invalid device tree.
>
> Sorry, please ignore this unrelated patch. I accidentally copied it to
> the wrong directory before sending this series.
Unfortunately patchwork decided to take this patch in instead of the
real 1/5 patch. Please make a clean repost even if there are no review
comments to address.
On 2/8/21 7:20 AM, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 08, 2021 at 12:31:34AM -0600, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> On 2/8/21 12:28 AM, Samuel Holland wrote:
>>> In commit e5c02cf54154 ("i2c: mv64xxx: Add runtime PM support"), error
>>> pointers to optional clocks were replaced by NULL to simplify the resume
>>> callback implementation. However, that commit missed that the IS_ERR
>>> check in mv64xxx_of_config should be replaced with a NULL check. As a
>>> result, the check always passes, even for an invalid device tree.
>>
>> Sorry, please ignore this unrelated patch. I accidentally copied it to
>> the wrong directory before sending this series.
>
> Hi Samuel
>
> This patch looks correct. But i don't see it in i2c/for-next, where as
> e5c02cf54154 is. I just want to make sure it does not get lost...
Thanks for the concern. I had already sent it separately[0], to the
appropriate maintainers, so this submission was a duplicate.
Cheers,
Samuel
[0]:
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/[email protected]/
> Andrew
>