From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99AFDC5DF61 for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 08:00:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69B4821D7B for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2019 08:00:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linaro.org header.i=@linaro.org header.b="I14DfnkJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727077AbfKGIAj (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 03:00:39 -0500 Received: from mail-lj1-f194.google.com ([209.85.208.194]:36021 "EHLO mail-lj1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726734AbfKGIAi (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2019 03:00:38 -0500 Received: by mail-lj1-f194.google.com with SMTP id k15so1169498lja.3 for ; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:37 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linaro.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=MhaY0ugk8kwsxq3FKugkspL2MYGqh9zusrvzrZWI37A=; b=I14DfnkJr2s5xHB5Em9zNk3CnxEv+KsQd0RLv0S2M8Zbd+JBPrWQJLyDLI7UsFnUyU jewSW9KGU/5Mj9rdaNo/E2CyOlWqdkGPzV0FKD8pzXnXD3OmuC/TsBCYNhSg17P6FrJ5 yO/9vByIOBxYr8lAEcOkeM/NE1hghWfDpsgq3uX5OL8n451FtpVVRIhZkjqCAZ7uX944 lPTNCMOLpkf4y0CWt1TIVJuYzQfJ5LVPfLv4/nI9ZLCt88eZu1rYn+LQ/rUHDWf9xG3A PTkIKjTPMdR856l4uTDdUmyGArjXOYE5n9URj12P9bxKJYTmmXrwUZqQ+7tFtbtsxz5R tAag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=MhaY0ugk8kwsxq3FKugkspL2MYGqh9zusrvzrZWI37A=; b=T9EFebYP9ZWAexRyyQCdHHZm6XfePkBp7gHouizSuwFWkqRNHasLi8yOY77Ma9t6Bq q2Dth1Np15eQca9ATNdvcarxfm9VMgw84sKJPjSriGHKmA0sehuDFA5GIOm5mI0X3LiD Dy37rqwGEIJU9LGsLZGVd/2GD3NJT9+339KYIuGEdwCgkyxjFjQZMQ4Fb4NaOEkheiau V1c0iSb1hmZfZCSMRHAragMJcKGGhbeNuSrH9C2UF0c0lTk2LDNxPrlDpIgvVUkDXTH8 SpSgqW+aqvte3g45KAhFh+P0lVPPBuFZ01J8yQ005RUit1hv4LlX6H6wSRPdDam++0+B dJ0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUKIYV6BzOEkrJlRMkJkHeow7OO5ivTpbJpX75jEFMLEn/e7+/G Gq8nn7EMIsWjRFRvfeM1eruhoZdNvVyeV6EvjU/kPw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzRSNCULNUNJVqaJNgU2Aq5iaQhDKeZCxYwvKxqVktkZ0uhZzJPx1LEXl2tE4KbyibfhtzJ5OdCkeugYriABVE= X-Received: by 2002:a2e:5c46:: with SMTP id q67mr1273474ljb.42.1573113636714; Thu, 07 Nov 2019 00:00:36 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20191106161705.GA11849@sirena.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20191106161705.GA11849@sirena.co.uk> From: Linus Walleij Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2019 09:00:25 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Linux-next-20191106 : arm64: Internal error: Oops: 96000007 To: Mark Brown Cc: Robin Murphy , Naresh Kamboju , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Linux ARM , Stephen Rothwell , Arnd Bergmann , open list , lkft-triage@lists.linaro.org, John Stultz , Linux-Next Mailing List Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-next-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-next@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 6, 2019 at 5:17 PM Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 04:07:52PM +0000, Robin Murphy wrote: > > > FWIW this smells like a builtin driver had its of_device_id table marked > > __init, leaving drv->of_match_table as a dangling pointer to freed memory by > > this point. > > Indeed, in fact I sent a fix for this to Linus Walleij yesterday having > seen the relevant build warning when testing -next. Someone already > reported that it fixed the boot issues. Hopefully Linus will pick it up > soon :/ Yeah picked it up and pushed out now. I wish I'd been quicker with it but the patch spot activity has been high. (Bad signal-to-noise ratio on the mailing lists.) I wonder if it's worth to look at the static checkers like checkpatch to warn for this? There is always a bit of delicate balance between just fixing some weird one-off problems and making sure they never happen again. Yours, Linus Walleij