Re: [PATCH V7 2/4] rpmsg: Guard against null endpoint ops in destroy

From: Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Chris Lew <clew@codeaurora.org>
Cc: Deepak Kumar Singh <deesin@codeaurora.org>,
	bjorn.andersson@linaro.org, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org,
	Arun Kumar Neelakantam <aneela@codeaurora.org>,
	Ohad Ben-Cohen <ohad@wizery.com>,
	"open list:REMOTE PROCESSOR MESSAGING (RPMSG) SUBSYSTEM" 
	<linux-remoteproc@vger.kernel.org>,
	open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 2/4] rpmsg: Guard against null endpoint ops in destroy
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2020 07:55:18 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200808055518.GF1037591@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e7fc6957-5065-9dbc-2f2d-d24893fead63@codeaurora.org>

On Fri, Aug 07, 2020 at 05:33:53PM -0700, Chris Lew wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> 
> On 8/7/2020 12:59 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 10:15:19PM +0530, Deepak Kumar Singh wrote:
> > > From: Chris Lew <clew@codeaurora.org>
> > > 
> > > In RPMSG GLINK the chrdev device will allocate an ept as part of the
> > > rpdev creation. This device will not register endpoint ops even though
> > > it has an allocated ept. Protect against the case where the device is
> > > being destroyed.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Chris Lew <clew@codeaurora.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Deepak Kumar Singh <deesin@codeaurora.org>
> > > Signed-off-by: Arun Kumar Neelakantam <aneela@codeaurora.org>
> > 
> > Should this be marked for stable kernels?
> > 
> > And if so, what commit does this fix?  Any reason the Fixes: tag was not
> > used here?
> > 
> 
> The crash that this fixes doesn't show up unless one of the previous patches
> in the series is applied.
> 
> [PATCH V6 3/5] rpmsg: glink: Add support for rpmsg glink chrdev
> 
> I'm not sure if the fixes tag should apply to this change or one of the
> commits to the base rpmsg code.

That's a different series, why not merge this patch with that one so
there is no need for a fix if none of this has been merged yet?

> > And what happened to this series?  I don't see it in linux-next, did the
> > maintainer ignore it?
> > 
> 
> I believe most of the review feedback for the series has been addressed by
> Deepak. There is one remaining action item for me and Deepak to provide more
> concrete evidence that the first patch in the series is needed.
> 
> [PATCH V6 1/5] rpmsg: glink: Use complete_all for open states

Ok, thanks, just didn't want to see this get forgotten...

greg k-h