| Message ID | 20191204144106.10876-1-alexandre.torgue@st.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | pinctrl: pinmux: fix a possible null pointer in pinmux_can_be_used_for_gpio | expand |
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:41 PM Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com> wrote: > This commit adds a check on ops pointer to avoid a kernel panic when > ops->strict is used. Indeed, on some pinctrl driver (at least for > pinctrl-stmfx) the pinmux ops is not implemented. Let's assume than gpio > can be used in this case. > > Fixes: 472a61e777fe ("pinctrl/gpio: Take MUX usage into account") > Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com> Patch applied for fixes. Yours, Linus Walleij
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c index e914f6efd39e..9503ddf2edc7 100644 --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinmux.c @@ -85,7 +85,7 @@ bool pinmux_can_be_used_for_gpio(struct pinctrl_dev *pctldev, unsigned pin) const struct pinmux_ops *ops = pctldev->desc->pmxops; /* Can't inspect pin, assume it can be used */ - if (!desc) + if (!desc || !ops) return true; if (ops->strict && desc->mux_usecount)
This commit adds a check on ops pointer to avoid a kernel panic when ops->strict is used. Indeed, on some pinctrl driver (at least for pinctrl-stmfx) the pinmux ops is not implemented. Let's assume than gpio can be used in this case. Fixes: 472a61e777fe ("pinctrl/gpio: Take MUX usage into account") Signed-off-by: Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@st.com>