| Message ID | 20140324181112.GN19349@intel.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Not Applicable, archived |
| Headers | show |
2014-03-24, 20:11:12 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 08:00:33PM +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 04:49:44PM +0100, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > With next-20140324, I get the BUG below when I modprobe ssb. > > > I bisected it to aa92b6f689ac > > > "gpio / ACPI: Allocate ACPI specific data directly in acpi_gpiochip_add()" > > > > > > The device that needs ssb is: > > > 0c:00.0 Network controller [0280]: Broadcom Corporation BCM4321 802.11a/b/g/n [14e4:4328] (rev 03) > > > Subsystem: Dell Wireless 1500 Draft 802.11n WLAN Mini-card [1028:000a] > > > Kernel driver in use: b43-pci-bridge > > > Kernel modules: ssb > > > > > > > > > [ 92.693606] ssb: Found chip with id 0x4321, rev 0x03 and package 0x00 > > > [ 92.693649] ssb: Core 0 found: ChipCommon (cc 0x800, rev 0x13, vendor 0x4243) > > > [ 92.693675] ssb: Core 1 found: IEEE 802.11 (cc 0x812, rev 0x0C, vendor 0x4243) > > > [ 92.693699] ssb: Core 2 found: PCI-E (cc 0x820, rev 0x04, vendor 0x4243) > > > [ 92.693723] ssb: Core 3 found: PCI (cc 0x804, rev 0x0D, vendor 0x4243) > > > [ 92.693746] ssb: Core 4 found: USB 1.1 Host (cc 0x817, rev 0x04, vendor 0x4243) > > > [ 92.753554] BUG: unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at 00000138 > > > [ 92.753760] IP: [<c126c2b3>] acpi_gpiochip_add+0x13/0x190 > > > [ 92.753901] *pde = 00000000 > > > [ 92.753986] Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP > > > [ 92.754125] Modules linked in: ssb(+) mmc_core netconsole nouveau mxm_wmi i2c_algo_bit drm_kms_helper ttm drm joydev mousedev tg3 coretemp kvm_intel ptp pcmcia kvm pps_core libphy dell_laptop gpio_ich rfkill yenta_socket pcmcia_rsrc intel_agp intel_gtt iTCO_wdt iTCO_vendor_support dell_wmi sparse_keymap pcmcia_core evdev agpgart dcdbas snd_hda_codec_idt snd_hda_codec_generic microcode psmouse pcspkr i2c_i801 i2c_core serio_raw lpc_ich mfd_core acpi_cpufreq ac battery thermal button wmi snd_hda_intel snd_hda_controller snd_hda_codec snd_hwdep snd_pcm video snd_timer shpchp processor snd soundcore nfs lockd sunrpc ext4 crc16 mbcache jbd2 sd_mod sr_mod cdrom ata_generic pata_acpi ata_piix libata scsi_mod firewire_ohci firewire_core crc_itu_t uhci_hcd ehci_pci ehci_hcd usbcore usb_common > > > [ 92.756833] CPU: 0 PID: 512 Comm: modprobe Tainted: G W 3.14.0-rc7-next-20140324-t1 #24 > > > [ 92.756833] Hardware name: Dell Inc. Latitude D830 /0UY141, BIOS A02 06/07/2007 > > > [ 92.756833] task: f5799900 ti: f543e000 task.ti: f543e000 > > > [ 92.756833] EIP: 0060:[<c126c2b3>] EFLAGS: 00010282 CPU: 0 > > > [ 92.756833] EIP is at acpi_gpiochip_add+0x13/0x190 > > > [ 92.756833] EAX: 00000000 EBX: f57824c4 ECX: 00000000 EDX: 00000000 > > > [ 92.756833] ESI: f57824c4 EDI: 00000010 EBP: f543fc54 ESP: f543fc40 > > > [ 92.756833] DS: 007b ES: 007b FS: 00d8 GS: 0033 SS: 0068 > > > [ 92.756833] CR0: 8005003b CR2: 00000138 CR3: 355f8000 CR4: 000007d0 > > > > To me looks like chip->dev is NULL. My understanding is that the GPIO core > > wants to have it non-NULL. > > Actually gpiolib seems to handle ->dev as optional. Can you try this patch > instead? Thanks. > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > index bf0f8b476696..642b2bf3360e 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > @@ -501,6 +501,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) > acpi_handle handle; > acpi_status status; > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > + return; > + > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > if (!handle) > return; > @@ -531,6 +534,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip) > acpi_handle handle; > acpi_status status; > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > + return; > + > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > if (!handle) > return; Thanks, this patch solves the problem.
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:31:11PM +0100, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > Actually gpiolib seems to handle ->dev as optional. Can you try this patch > > instead? Thanks. > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > index bf0f8b476696..642b2bf3360e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > @@ -501,6 +501,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > acpi_handle handle; > > acpi_status status; > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > + return; > > + > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > if (!handle) > > return; > > @@ -531,6 +534,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > acpi_handle handle; > > acpi_status status; > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > + return; > > + > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > if (!handle) > > return; > > Thanks, this patch solves the problem. Great thanks for testing. Can I add your tested-by to the patch? I'll submit a formal patch for this next week as I'm currently on vacation. -- 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
2014-03-25, 09:25:30 +0200, Mika Westerberg wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 07:31:11PM +0100, Sabrina Dubroca wrote: > > > Actually gpiolib seems to handle ->dev as optional. Can you try this patch > > > instead? Thanks. > > > > > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > index bf0f8b476696..642b2bf3360e 100644 > > > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c > > > @@ -501,6 +501,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > > acpi_handle handle; > > > acpi_status status; > > > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > > + return; > > > + > > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > > if (!handle) > > > return; > > > @@ -531,6 +534,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip) > > > acpi_handle handle; > > > acpi_status status; > > > > > > + if (!chip || !chip->dev) > > > + return; > > > + > > > handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); > > > if (!handle) > > > return; > > > > Thanks, this patch solves the problem. > > Great thanks for testing. Can I add your tested-by to the patch? > > I'll submit a formal patch for this next week as I'm currently on vacation. Sure: Tested-by: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net> Thanks again,
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c index bf0f8b476696..642b2bf3360e 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpiolib-acpi.c @@ -501,6 +501,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_add(struct gpio_chip *chip) acpi_handle handle; acpi_status status; + if (!chip || !chip->dev) + return; + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); if (!handle) return; @@ -531,6 +534,9 @@ void acpi_gpiochip_remove(struct gpio_chip *chip) acpi_handle handle; acpi_status status; + if (!chip || !chip->dev) + return; + handle = ACPI_HANDLE(chip->dev); if (!handle) return;