Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] tpm/tpm_tis: Free IRQ if probing fails | From | Hans de Goede <> | Date | Mon, 13 Apr 2020 20:11:15 +0200 |
| |
Hi,
On 4/13/20 8:07 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Apr 13, 2020 at 12:04:25PM +0200, Hans de Goede wrote: >> Hi Jarkko, >> >> On 4/12/20 7:04 PM, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: >>> Call devm_free_irq() if we have to revert to polling in order not to >>> unnecessarily reserve the IRQ for the life-cycle of the driver. >>> >>> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 4.5.x >>> Reported-by: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com> >>> Fixes: e3837e74a06d ("tpm_tis: Refactor the interrupt setup") >>> Signed-off-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@linux.intel.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c | 5 ++++- >>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >>> index 27c6ca031e23..ae6868e7b696 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >>> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis_core.c >>> @@ -1062,9 +1062,12 @@ int tpm_tis_core_init(struct device *dev, struct tpm_tis_data *priv, int irq, >>> if (irq) { >>> tpm_tis_probe_irq_single(chip, intmask, IRQF_SHARED, >>> irq); >>> - if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ)) >>> + if (!(chip->flags & TPM_CHIP_FLAG_IRQ)) { >>> dev_err(&chip->dev, FW_BUG >>> "TPM interrupt not working, polling instead\n"); >>> + devm_free_irq(chip->dev.parent, priv->irq, >>> + chip); >>> + } >> >> My initial plan was actually to do something similar, but if the probe code >> is actually ever fixed to work as intended again then this will lead to a >> double free as then the IRQ-test path of tpm_tis_send() will have called >> disable_interrupts() which already calls devm_free_irq(). >> >> You could check for chip->irq != 0 here to avoid that. >> >> But it all is rather messy, which is why I went with the "#if 0" approach >> in my patch. > > I think it is right way to fix it. It is a bug independent of the issue > we are experiencing. > > However, what you are suggesting should be done in addition. Do you have > a patch in place or do you want me to refine mine?
I do not have a patch ready for this, if you can refine yours that would be great.
Regards,
Hans
| |