Hi Hans, Adrian,

On Sat, 25 Feb 2017 18:23:56 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Calling acpi_device_fix_up_power() on a device which is not present
> is not a good idea.

How bad is it?

This was introduced by commit e5bbf30733f9, which was backported to
several stable branches. If it causes real trouble then this fix-up
patch should be annotated with

Fixes: e5bbf30733f9 ("mmc: sdhci-acpi: Ensure connected devices are powered 
when")

and Cc's to stable@, so it can be propagated to all affected trees.

> While at it also call acpi_bus_get_status() on the children before
> the status check to make sure that child->status contains valid data.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Hans de Goede <[email protected]>
> ---
>  drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> index 96465ff..873beae 100644
> --- a/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> +++ b/drivers/mmc/host/sdhci-acpi.c
> @@ -394,15 +394,15 @@ static int sdhci_acpi_probe(struct platform_device 
> *pdev)
>       if (acpi_bus_get_device(handle, &device))
>               return -ENODEV;
>  
> +     if (acpi_bus_get_status(device) || !device->status.present)
> +             return -ENODEV;
> +
>       /* Power on the SDHCI controller and its children */
>       acpi_device_fix_up_power(device);
>       list_for_each_entry(child, &device->children, node)
>               if (child->status.present && child->status.enabled)
>                       acpi_device_fix_up_power(child);
>  
> -     if (acpi_bus_get_status(device) || !device->status.present)
> -             return -ENODEV;
> -
>       if (sdhci_acpi_byt_defer(dev))
>               return -EPROBE_DEFER;
>  


-- 
Jean Delvare
SUSE L3 Support

Reply via email to