ASoC: topology: fix soc_tplg_fe_link_create() - link->dobj initialization order
diff mbox series

Message ID 20200122190752.3081016-1-perex@perex.cz
State Accepted
Commit 8ce1cbd6ce0b1bda0c980c64fee4c1e1378355f1
Headers show
Series
  • ASoC: topology: fix soc_tplg_fe_link_create() - link->dobj initialization order
Related show

Commit Message

Jaroslav Kysela Jan. 22, 2020, 7:07 p.m. UTC
The code which checks the return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link() call
in soc_tplg_fe_link_create() moved the snd_soc_add_dai_link() call before
link->dobj members initialization.

While it does not affect the latest kernels, the old soc-core.c code
in the stable kernels is affected. The snd_soc_add_dai_link() function uses
the link->dobj.type member to check, if the link structure is valid.

Reorder the link->dobj initialization to make things work again.
It's harmless for the recent code (and the structure should be properly
initialized before other calls anyway).

The problem is in stable linux-5.4.y since version 5.4.11 when the
upstream commit 76d270364932 was applied.

Fixes: 76d270364932 ("ASoC: topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()")
Cc: Dragos Tarcatu <dragos_tarcatu@mentor.com>
Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
---
 sound/soc/soc-topology.c | 7 ++++---
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

Comments

Pierre-Louis Bossart Jan. 22, 2020, 7:28 p.m. UTC | #1
On 1/22/20 1:07 PM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> The code which checks the return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link() call
> in soc_tplg_fe_link_create() moved the snd_soc_add_dai_link() call before
> link->dobj members initialization.
> 
> While it does not affect the latest kernels, the old soc-core.c code
> in the stable kernels is affected. The snd_soc_add_dai_link() function uses
> the link->dobj.type member to check, if the link structure is valid.
> 
> Reorder the link->dobj initialization to make things work again.
> It's harmless for the recent code (and the structure should be properly
> initialized before other calls anyway).
> 
> The problem is in stable linux-5.4.y since version 5.4.11 when the
> upstream commit 76d270364932 was applied.

I am not following. Is this a fix for linux-5.4-y only, or is it needed 
on Mark's tree? In the latter case, what is broken? We've been using 
Mark's tree without issues, wondering what we missed?

> 
> Fixes: 76d270364932 ("ASoC: topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()")
> Cc: Dragos Tarcatu <dragos_tarcatu@mentor.com>
> Cc: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Ranjani Sridharan <ranjani.sridharan@linux.intel.com>
> Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jaroslav Kysela <perex@perex.cz>
> ---
>   sound/soc/soc-topology.c | 7 ++++---
>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
> index 92e4f4d08bfa..4e1fe623c390 100644
> --- a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
> +++ b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
> @@ -1906,6 +1906,10 @@ static int soc_tplg_fe_link_create(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
>   	link->num_codecs = 1;
>   	link->num_platforms = 1;
>   
> +	link->dobj.index = tplg->index;
> +	link->dobj.ops = tplg->ops;
> +	link->dobj.type = SND_SOC_DOBJ_DAI_LINK;
> +
>   	if (strlen(pcm->pcm_name)) {
>   		link->name = kstrdup(pcm->pcm_name, GFP_KERNEL);
>   		link->stream_name = kstrdup(pcm->pcm_name, GFP_KERNEL);
> @@ -1942,9 +1946,6 @@ static int soc_tplg_fe_link_create(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
>   		goto err;
>   	}
>   
> -	link->dobj.index = tplg->index;
> -	link->dobj.ops = tplg->ops;
> -	link->dobj.type = SND_SOC_DOBJ_DAI_LINK;
>   	list_add(&link->dobj.list, &tplg->comp->dobj_list);
>   
>   	return 0;
>
Mark Brown Jan. 22, 2020, 8:25 p.m. UTC | #2
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 01:28:57PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> On 1/22/20 1:07 PM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:

> > The code which checks the return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link() call
> > in soc_tplg_fe_link_create() moved the snd_soc_add_dai_link() call before
> > link->dobj members initialization.

> > While it does not affect the latest kernels, the old soc-core.c code
> > in the stable kernels is affected. The snd_soc_add_dai_link() function uses
> > the link->dobj.type member to check, if the link structure is valid.

> > Reorder the link->dobj initialization to make things work again.
> > It's harmless for the recent code (and the structure should be properly
> > initialized before other calls anyway).

> > The problem is in stable linux-5.4.y since version 5.4.11 when the
> > upstream commit 76d270364932 was applied.

> I am not following. Is this a fix for linux-5.4-y only, or is it needed on
> Mark's tree? In the latter case, what is broken? We've been using Mark's
> tree without issues, wondering what we missed?

He's saying it's a fix for stable but it's just a cleanup and robustness
improvement in current kernels - when the patch 76d270364932 (ASoC:
topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()) was backported
by the bot the bot missed some other context which triggered bugs.

Copying in Sasha and Greg for stable (not sure if the list works by
itself).
Jaroslav Kysela Jan. 22, 2020, 8:49 p.m. UTC | #3
Dne 22. 01. 20 v 21:25 Mark Brown napsal(a):
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 01:28:57PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>> On 1/22/20 1:07 PM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> 
>>> The code which checks the return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link() call
>>> in soc_tplg_fe_link_create() moved the snd_soc_add_dai_link() call before
>>> link->dobj members initialization.
> 
>>> While it does not affect the latest kernels, the old soc-core.c code
>>> in the stable kernels is affected. The snd_soc_add_dai_link() function uses
>>> the link->dobj.type member to check, if the link structure is valid.
> 
>>> Reorder the link->dobj initialization to make things work again.
>>> It's harmless for the recent code (and the structure should be properly
>>> initialized before other calls anyway).
> 
>>> The problem is in stable linux-5.4.y since version 5.4.11 when the
>>> upstream commit 76d270364932 was applied.
> 
>> I am not following. Is this a fix for linux-5.4-y only, or is it needed on
>> Mark's tree? In the latter case, what is broken? We've been using Mark's
>> tree without issues, wondering what we missed?
> 
> He's saying it's a fix for stable but it's just a cleanup and robustness
> improvement in current kernels - when the patch 76d270364932 (ASoC:
> topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()) was backported
> by the bot the bot missed some other context which triggered bugs.

Exactly. It's because the commit 237d19080cd37e1ccf5462e63d8577d713f6da46 
("ASoC: soc-core: remove topology specific operation") removed the link->dobj 
checks, but this commit was not picked to the stable kernels.

The initialization reordering is fine for all kernels (and makes sense), so I 
would like to apply it everywhere.

			Thanks,
				Jaroslav
Pierre-Louis Bossart Jan. 22, 2020, 9:47 p.m. UTC | #4
>>> I am not following. Is this a fix for linux-5.4-y only, or is it 
>>> needed on
>>> Mark's tree? In the latter case, what is broken? We've been using Mark's
>>> tree without issues, wondering what we missed?
>>
>> He's saying it's a fix for stable but it's just a cleanup and robustness
>> improvement in current kernels - when the patch 76d270364932 (ASoC:
>> topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()) was backported
>> by the bot the bot missed some other context which triggered bugs.
> 
> Exactly. It's because the commit 
> 237d19080cd37e1ccf5462e63d8577d713f6da46 ("ASoC: soc-core: remove 
> topology specific operation") removed the link->dobj checks, but this 
> commit was not picked to the stable kernels.
> 
> The initialization reordering is fine for all kernels (and makes sense), 
> so I would like to apply it everywhere.

ok, thanks for the precisions.
Greg Kroah-Hartman Jan. 23, 2020, 6:43 a.m. UTC | #5
On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 08:25:30PM +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 01:28:57PM -0600, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
> > On 1/22/20 1:07 PM, Jaroslav Kysela wrote:
> 
> > > The code which checks the return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link() call
> > > in soc_tplg_fe_link_create() moved the snd_soc_add_dai_link() call before
> > > link->dobj members initialization.
> 
> > > While it does not affect the latest kernels, the old soc-core.c code
> > > in the stable kernels is affected. The snd_soc_add_dai_link() function uses
> > > the link->dobj.type member to check, if the link structure is valid.
> 
> > > Reorder the link->dobj initialization to make things work again.
> > > It's harmless for the recent code (and the structure should be properly
> > > initialized before other calls anyway).
> 
> > > The problem is in stable linux-5.4.y since version 5.4.11 when the
> > > upstream commit 76d270364932 was applied.
> 
> > I am not following. Is this a fix for linux-5.4-y only, or is it needed on
> > Mark's tree? In the latter case, what is broken? We've been using Mark's
> > tree without issues, wondering what we missed?
> 
> He's saying it's a fix for stable but it's just a cleanup and robustness
> improvement in current kernels - when the patch 76d270364932 (ASoC:
> topology: Check return value for snd_soc_add_dai_link()) was backported
> by the bot the bot missed some other context which triggered bugs.
> 
> Copying in Sasha and Greg for stable (not sure if the list works by
> itself).

How this was marked-up is fine, our scripts can easily handle it,
thanks.

greg k-h

Patch
diff mbox series

diff --git a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
index 92e4f4d08bfa..4e1fe623c390 100644
--- a/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
+++ b/sound/soc/soc-topology.c
@@ -1906,6 +1906,10 @@  static int soc_tplg_fe_link_create(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
 	link->num_codecs = 1;
 	link->num_platforms = 1;
 
+	link->dobj.index = tplg->index;
+	link->dobj.ops = tplg->ops;
+	link->dobj.type = SND_SOC_DOBJ_DAI_LINK;
+
 	if (strlen(pcm->pcm_name)) {
 		link->name = kstrdup(pcm->pcm_name, GFP_KERNEL);
 		link->stream_name = kstrdup(pcm->pcm_name, GFP_KERNEL);
@@ -1942,9 +1946,6 @@  static int soc_tplg_fe_link_create(struct soc_tplg *tplg,
 		goto err;
 	}
 
-	link->dobj.index = tplg->index;
-	link->dobj.ops = tplg->ops;
-	link->dobj.type = SND_SOC_DOBJ_DAI_LINK;
 	list_add(&link->dobj.list, &tplg->comp->dobj_list);
 
 	return 0;