Re: [irqchip: irq/irqchip-next] irqchip/ls-extirq: Fix endianness detection

From: Marc Zyngier
Date: Fri Dec 16 2022 - 14:24:00 EST


On 2022-12-16 19:11, Sean Anderson wrote:
On 12/16/22 13:22, Marc Zyngier wrote:
On 2022-12-16 16:37, Sean Anderson wrote:
Hi Stable maintainers,

On 12/5/22 06:21, irqchip-bot for Sean Anderson wrote:
The following commit has been merged into the irq/irqchip-next branch of irqchip:

Commit-ID:     3ae977d0e4e3a2a2ccc912ca2d20c9430508ecdd
Gitweb:        https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/maz/arm-platforms/3ae977d0e4e3a2a2ccc912ca2d20c9430508ecdd
Author:        Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx>
AuthorDate:    Thu, 01 Dec 2022 16:28:07 -05:00
Committer:     Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
CommitterDate: Mon, 05 Dec 2022 10:39:52

irqchip/ls-extirq: Fix endianness detection

parent is the interrupt parent, not the parent of node. Use
node->parent. This fixes endianness detection on big-endian platforms.

Fixes: 1b00adce8afd ("irqchip/ls-extirq: Fix invalid wait context by avoiding to use regmap")
Signed-off-by: Sean Anderson <sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221201212807.616191-1-sean.anderson@xxxxxxxx
---
 drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c b/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c
index d8d48b1..139f26b 100644
--- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c
+++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-ls-extirq.c
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@ ls_extirq_of_init(struct device_node *node, struct device_node *parent)
        if (ret)
                goto err_parse_map;

-       priv->big_endian = of_device_is_big_endian(parent);
+       priv->big_endian = of_device_is_big_endian(node->parent);
        priv->is_ls1021a_or_ls1043a = of_device_is_compatible(node, "fsl,ls1021a-extirq") ||
                                      of_device_is_compatible(node, "fsl,ls1043a-extirq");
        raw_spin_lock_init(&priv->lock);

This patch has made it into linux/master, but it should also get
backported to 6.1. Just want to make sure this doesn't fall through the
cracks, since this was a really annoying bug to deal with (causes an IRQ
storm).

If you wanted it backported, why didn't it have a Cc: stable
the first place? In any case, if you want a backport to happen,
you'll have to post that backport.

Usually, anything with a Fixes: tag gets picked up.

And I actively object to this for the subsystems I maintain,
so no, this isn't automatic.

Actually, I was
expecting you to submit a PR for 6.1, since this was submitted before
that release came out.

Expectations are better stated rather than being implicit.

That said, this email is "option 2" of
Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst, so I don't think I need
to do "option 3".

Here's to hope!

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...