| Message ID | 519E0F2A.4070602@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: > In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, > although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. > > Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. Thanks, Rafael > --- > drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ > 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > index bec717f..dd64f23 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c > @@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device > *device) > per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr; > > dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id); > + if (!dev) { > + result = -ENODEV; > + goto err_clear_processor; > + } > if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) { > result = -EFAULT; > goto err_clear_processor; >
On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, >> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. >> >> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> > > This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 > in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch. Thanks Hanjun > > Thanks, > Rafael > > >> --- >> drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ >> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> index bec717f..dd64f23 100644 >> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >> @@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device >> *device) >> per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr; >> >> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id); >> + if (!dev) { >> + result = -ENODEV; >> + goto err_clear_processor; >> + } >> if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) { >> result = -EFAULT; >> goto err_clear_processor; >>
Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, >>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> >> >> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 >> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. > > Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch. But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable series I will leave up to somebody else. ;) Martin > > Thanks > Hanjun > >> >> Thanks, >> Rafael >> >> >>> --- >>> drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ >>> 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >>> index bec717f..dd64f23 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c >>> @@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device >>> *device) >>> per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr; >>> >>> dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id); >>> + if (!dev) { >>> + result = -ENODEV; >>> + goto err_clear_processor; >>> + } >>> if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) { >>> result = -EFAULT; >>> goto err_clear_processor; >>> > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > >
On 2013-5-29 19:07, Martin Mokrejs wrote: > Hanjun Guo wrote: >> On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: >>>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, >>>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> >>> >>> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 >>> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. >> >> Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch. > > But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 > and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable > series I will leave up to somebody else. ;) Hi Rafeal, What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion? Thanks Hanjun > Martin
On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:29:54 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > On 2013-5-29 19:07, Martin Mokrejs wrote: > > Hanjun Guo wrote: > >> On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >>> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: > >>>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, > >>>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. > >>>> > >>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> > >>> > >>> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 > >>> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. > >> > >> Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch. > > > > But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 > > and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable > > series I will leave up to somebody else. ;) > > Hi Rafeal, > > What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion? Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable that don't have mainline counterparts. Greg, I wonder what your opinion is? Rafael
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 03:57:58PM +0200, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > On Thursday, May 30, 2013 10:29:54 AM Hanjun Guo wrote: > > On 2013-5-29 19:07, Martin Mokrejs wrote: > > > Hanjun Guo wrote: > > >> On 2013-5-29 7:30, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >>> On Thursday, May 23, 2013 08:44:26 PM Hanjun Guo wrote: > > >>>> In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, > > >>>> although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. > > >>>> > > >>>> Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> > > >>> > > >>> This patch isn't necessary any more after the changes queued up for 3.11 > > >>> in the acpi-hotplug branch of the linux-pm.git tree. > > >> > > >> Ok, I noticed your patch set, just drop my patch. > > > > > > But shouldn't this go to stable at least? I checked linux-3.9.4 > > > and it applies fine. Whether this is relevant for other stable > > > series I will leave up to somebody else. ;) > > > > Hi Rafeal, > > > > What's your opinion on Martin's suggestion? > > Well, this is kind of hard to say. We generally don't apply patches to -stable > that don't have mainline counterparts. > > Greg, I wonder what your opinion is? We do not apply patches to -stable that are not in Linus's tree, unless there is no problem in Linus's tree due to a major rewrite of the code, and it has been confirmed that the same problem isn't there. thanks, greg k-h
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c index bec717f..dd64f23 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c @@ -579,6 +579,10 @@ static int __cpuinit acpi_processor_add(struct acpi_device *device) per_cpu(processors, pr->id) = pr; dev = get_cpu_device(pr->id); + if (!dev) { + result = -ENODEV; + goto err_clear_processor; + } if (sysfs_create_link(&device->dev.kobj, &dev->kobj, "sysdev")) { result = -EFAULT;
In acpi_processor_add(), get_cpu_device() will return NULL sometimes, although the chances are small, I think it should be fixed. Signed-off-by: Hanjun Guo <hanjun.guo@linaro.org> --- drivers/acpi/processor_driver.c | 4 ++++ 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) goto err_clear_processor;