On 04/19/2016 08:14 PM, David Rivshin (Allworx) wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 18:44:41 +0300
Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.stras...@ti.com> wrote:

On 04/19/2016 06:01 PM, David Rivshin (Allworx) wrote:
On Tue, 19 Apr 2016 17:41:07 +0300
Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.stras...@ti.com> wrote:

Hi,

On 04/19/2016 04:56 PM, Andrew Goodbody wrote:
Adding a 2nd PHY to cpsw results in a NULL pointer dereference
as below. Fix by maintaining a reference to each PHY node in slave
struct instead of a single reference in the priv struct which was
overwritten by the 2nd PHY.

David, Is it possible to drop prev version of this patch from linux-next
- it breaks boot on many TI boards with -next.



[   17.870933] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual 
address 00000180
[   17.879557] pgd = dc8bc000
[   17.882514] [00000180] *pgd=9c882831, *pte=00000000, *ppte=00000000
[   17.889213] Internal error: Oops: 17 [#1] ARM
[   17.893838] Modules linked in:
[   17.897102] CPU: 0 PID: 1657 Comm: connmand Not tainted 4.5.0-ge463dfb-dirty 
#11
[   17.904947] Hardware name: Cambrionix whippet
[   17.909576] task: dc859240 ti: dc968000 task.ti: dc968000
[   17.915339] PC is at phy_attached_print+0x18/0x8c
[   17.920339] LR is at phy_attached_info+0x14/0x18
[   17.925247] pc : [<c042baec>]    lr : [<c042bb74>]    psr: 600f0113
[   17.925247] sp : dc969cf8  ip : dc969d28  fp : dc969d18
[   17.937425] r10: dda7a400  r9 : 00000000  r8 : 00000000
[   17.942971] r7 : 00000001  r6 : ddb00480  r5 : ddb8cb34  r4 : 00000000
[   17.949898] r3 : c0954cc0  r2 : c09562b0  r1 : 00000000  r0 : 00000000
[   17.956829] Flags: nZCv  IRQs on  FIQs on  Mode SVC_32  ISA ARM  Segment none
[   17.964401] Control: 10c5387d  Table: 9c8bc019  DAC: 00000051
[   17.970500] Process connmand (pid: 1657, stack limit = 0xdc968210)
[   17.977059] Stack: (0xdc969cf8 to 0xdc96a000)

[...]

[   18.323956] [<c05e4cb8>] (inet_ioctl) from [<c055f5ac>] 
(sock_ioctl+0x15c/0x2d8)
[   18.331829] [<c055f450>] (sock_ioctl) from [<c010b388>] 
(do_vfs_ioctl+0x98/0x8d0)
[   18.339765]  r7:00008914 r6:dc8ab4c0 r5:dd257ae0 r4:beaeda20
[   18.345822] [<c010b2f0>] (do_vfs_ioctl) from [<c010bc34>] 
(SyS_ioctl+0x74/0x84)
[   18.353573]  r10:00000000 r9:00000011 r8:beaeda20 r7:00008914 r6:dc8ab4c0 
r5:dc8ab4c0
[   18.361924]  r4:00000000
[   18.364653] [<c010bbc0>] (SyS_ioctl) from [<c00163e0>] 
(ret_fast_syscall+0x0/0x3c)
[   18.372682]  r9:dc968000 r8:c00165e8 r7:00000036 r6:00000002 r5:00000011 
r4:00000000
[   18.380960] Code: e92dd810 e24cb010 e24dd010 e59b4004 (e5902180)
[   18.387580] ---[ end trace c80529466223f3f3 ]---

^ Could you make it shorter and drop timestamps, pls?


Signed-off-by: Andrew Goodbody <andrew.goodb...@cambrionix.com>
---

v2 - Move allocation of memory for priv->slaves to inside cpsw_probe_dt so it
        has data->slaves initialised first which is needed to calculate size

    drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c | 30 +++++++++++++++---------------
    1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
index 42fdfd4..e62909c 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/ti/cpsw.c
@@ -349,6 +349,7 @@ struct cpsw_slave {
        struct cpsw_slave_data          *data;
        struct phy_device               *phy;
        struct net_device               *ndev;
+       struct device_node              *phy_node;
        u32                             port_vlan;
        u32                             open_stat;
    };
@@ -367,7 +368,6 @@ struct cpsw_priv {
        spinlock_t                      lock;
        struct platform_device          *pdev;
        struct net_device               *ndev;
-       struct device_node              *phy_node;
        struct napi_struct              napi_rx;
        struct napi_struct              napi_tx;
        struct device                   *dev;
@@ -1148,8 +1148,8 @@ static void cpsw_slave_open(struct cpsw_slave *slave, 
struct cpsw_priv *priv)
                cpsw_ale_add_mcast(priv->ale, priv->ndev->broadcast,
                                   1 << slave_port, 0, 0, ALE_MCAST_FWD_2);

-       if (priv->phy_node)
-               slave->phy = of_phy_connect(priv->ndev, priv->phy_node,
+       if (slave->phy_node)
+               slave->phy = of_phy_connect(priv->ndev, slave->phy_node,
                                 &cpsw_adjust_link, 0, slave->data->phy_if);
        else
                slave->phy = phy_connect(priv->ndev, slave->data->phy_id,
@@ -1946,7 +1946,7 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dt(struct cpsw_priv *priv,
        struct device_node *node = pdev->dev.of_node;
        struct device_node *slave_node;
        struct cpsw_platform_data *data = &priv->data;
-       int i = 0, ret;
+       int i, ret;
        u32 prop;

        if (!node)
@@ -1958,6 +1958,14 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dt(struct cpsw_priv *priv,
        }
        data->slaves = prop;

+       priv->slaves = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev,
+                                   sizeof(struct cpsw_slave) * data->slaves,
+                                   GFP_KERNEL);
+       if (!priv->slaves)
+               return -ENOMEM;
+       for (i = 0; i < data->slaves; i++)
+               priv->slaves[i].slave_num = i;
+
        if (of_property_read_u32(node, "active_slave", &prop)) {
                dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Missing active_slave property in the 
DT.\n");
                return -EINVAL;
@@ -2023,6 +2031,7 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dt(struct cpsw_priv *priv,
        if (ret)
                dev_warn(&pdev->dev, "Doesn't have any child node\n");

+       i = 0;
        for_each_child_of_node(node, slave_node) {
                struct cpsw_slave_data *slave_data = data->slave_data + i;
                const void *mac_addr = NULL;
@@ -2033,7 +2042,8 @@ static int cpsw_probe_dt(struct cpsw_priv *priv,
                if (strcmp(slave_node->name, "slave"))
                        continue;

-               priv->phy_node = of_parse_phandle(slave_node, "phy-handle", 0);
+               priv->slaves[i].phy_node =
+                       of_parse_phandle(slave_node, "phy-handle", 0);

i++?

Ideally, the simplest way is to save phy_node in slave_data, but ...
(see comment below).

FYI, I have a patch [1] that does exactly that in my queue. Sorry
I've been busy and haven't had a chance to rebase/retest/resubmit
since Nicolas gave his Tested-By (and I missed Andrew's original
patch). I can probably steal some time to resurrect that quickly
if it's preferred, just let me know.

[1] http://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg357772.html

Ah Ok. There are no user of cpsw_platform_data outside of net/ethernet/ti/,
so yes, looks like your patch 1 does exactly what's needed.

Given that the v1 of Andrew's patch is already in Dave's net tree, and
would obviously have many conflicts with mine, how should I proceed?
Since you already requested Dave revert that patch, should I just wait
for that to happen and then resubmit my series?

Dave, Does that sound good to you?


May be you can send revert + your patch 1 (only fix for this issue).


Dave, Does that sound good to you?

--
regards,
-grygorii

Reply via email to