| Message ID | 1247381251-27031-1-git-send-email-keithp@keithp.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Superseded, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Sun, 2009-07-12 at 14:47 +0800, keithp@keithp.com wrote: > From: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> > > acpi_video_put_one_device was attempting to remove sysfs entries and > unregister a backlight device without first checking that said backlight > device structure had been created. > > Signed-off-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> Acked-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/video.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/video.c b/drivers/acpi/video.c > index 8851315..60ea984 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/video.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/video.c > @@ -2004,8 +2004,11 @@ static int acpi_video_bus_put_one_device(struct acpi_video_device *device) > status = acpi_remove_notify_handler(device->dev->handle, > ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, > acpi_video_device_notify); > - sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); > - backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); > + if (device->backlight) { > + sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); > + backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); > + device->backlight = NULL; > + } > if (device->cdev) { > sysfs_remove_link(&device->dev->dev.kobj, > "thermal_cooling"); -- 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
> acpi: don't free non-existant backlight in acpi video module "existent" :) On Sat, 11 Jul 2009 23:47:31 -0700 keithp@keithp.com wrote: > From: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> > > acpi_video_put_one_device was attempting to remove sysfs entries and > unregister a backlight device without first checking that said backlight > device structure had been created. > > Signed-off-by: Keith Packard <keithp@keithp.com> > --- > drivers/acpi/video.c | 7 +++++-- > 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/acpi/video.c b/drivers/acpi/video.c > index 8851315..60ea984 100644 > --- a/drivers/acpi/video.c > +++ b/drivers/acpi/video.c > @@ -2004,8 +2004,11 @@ static int acpi_video_bus_put_one_device(struct acpi_video_device *device) > status = acpi_remove_notify_handler(device->dev->handle, > ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, > acpi_video_device_notify); > - sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); > - backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); > + if (device->backlight) { > + sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); > + backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); > + device->backlight = NULL; > + } > if (device->cdev) { > sysfs_remove_link(&device->dev->dev.kobj, > "thermal_cooling"); um, OK. Under which circumstances was this observed? For symmetry we could instead test acpi_video_backlight_support() here. The patch assumes that someone initially zeroed device->backlight. Is that true and reliable? If so, is the memset(&device->cap, 0, sizeof(device->cap)); in acpi_video_device_find_cap() needed? Where's [patch 2/2], btw? -- 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
diff --git a/drivers/acpi/video.c b/drivers/acpi/video.c index 8851315..60ea984 100644 --- a/drivers/acpi/video.c +++ b/drivers/acpi/video.c @@ -2004,8 +2004,11 @@ static int acpi_video_bus_put_one_device(struct acpi_video_device *device) status = acpi_remove_notify_handler(device->dev->handle, ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, acpi_video_device_notify); - sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); - backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); + if (device->backlight) { + sysfs_remove_link(&device->backlight->dev.kobj, "device"); + backlight_device_unregister(device->backlight); + device->backlight = NULL; + } if (device->cdev) { sysfs_remove_link(&device->dev->dev.kobj, "thermal_cooling");