Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-89566-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45e3:2400::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45e3:2400::1;
Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2024 13:25:45 -0600
From: Bjorn Andersson <andersson@kernel.org>
To: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
Cc: konrad.dybcio@linaro.org, linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linus.walleij@linaro.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 7/9] firmware: qcom: scm: Fix __scm->dev assignement
Message-ID: <n2gomlmlzwodpg2v3gzuc62n3plewdqgiwctrv2tawdih26rig@obqd2a2ovqvp>
References: <20240227155308.18395-1-quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
 <20240227155308.18395-8-quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240227155308.18395-8-quic_mojha@quicinc.com>

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 09:23:06PM +0530, Mukesh Ojha wrote:
> qcom_scm_is_available() gives wrong indication if __scm
> is initialized but __scm->dev is not.
> 
> Fix this appropriately by making sure if __scm is
> initialized and then it is associated with its
> device.
> 

This seems like a bug fix, and should as such have a Fixes: tag and
probably Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org

> Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <quic_mojha@quicinc.com>
> ---
>  drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
> index 6c252cddd44e..6f14254c0c10 100644
> --- a/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
> +++ b/drivers/firmware/qcom/qcom_scm.c
> @@ -1859,6 +1859,7 @@ static int qcom_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	if (!scm)
>  		return -ENOMEM;
>  
> +	scm->dev = &pdev->dev;
>  	ret = qcom_scm_find_dload_address(&pdev->dev, &scm->dload_mode_addr);
>  	if (ret < 0)
>  		return ret;
> @@ -1895,7 +1896,6 @@ static int qcom_scm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	__scm = scm;
> -	__scm->dev = &pdev->dev;

Is it sufficient to just move the line up, or do we need a barrier of
some sort here?

Regards,
Bjorn

>  
>  	init_completion(&__scm->waitq_comp);
>  
> -- 
> 2.43.0.254.ga26002b62827
>