On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 08:47:54AM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > On 12/08/2016 08:27 AM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2016 at 08:54:43PM -0800, Florian Fainelli wrote: > >> Commit 3e3aaf649416 ("phy: fix mdiobus module safety") fixed the way we > >> dealt with MDIO bus module reference count, but sort of introduced a > >> regression in that, if an Ethernet driver registers its own MDIO bus > >> driver, as is common, we will end up with the Ethernet driver's > >> module->refnct set to 1, thus preventing this driver from any removal. > >> > >> Fix this by comparing the network device's device driver owner against > >> the MDIO bus driver owner, and only if they are different, increment the > >> MDIO bus module refcount. > >> > >> Fixes: 3e3aaf649416 ("phy: fix mdiobus module safety") > >> Signed-off-by: Florian Fainelli <f.faine...@gmail.com> > >> --- > >> Russell, > >> > >> I verified this against the ethoc driver primarily (on a TS7300 board) > >> and bcmgenet. > >> > >> Thanks! > >> > >> drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c | 16 +++++++++++++--- > >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > >> index 1a4bf8acad78..c4ceb082e970 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/phy_device.c > >> @@ -857,11 +857,17 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(phy_attached_print); > >> int phy_attach_direct(struct net_device *dev, struct phy_device *phydev, > >> u32 flags, phy_interface_t interface) > >> { > >> + struct module *ndev_owner = dev->dev.parent->driver->owner; > > > > Is this really safe? A driver does not need to set a parent device, and > > in that case you get a NULL-deref here (I tried using cpsw). > > Humm, cpsw does call SET_NETDEV_DEV() which should take care of that, is > the call made too late? Do you have an example oops?
Sorry if I was being unclear, cpsw does set a parent device, but there are network driver that do not. Perhaps such drivers will never hit this code path, but I can't say for sure and everything appear to work for cpsw if you comment out that SET_NETDEV_DEV (well, at least before this patch). > I don't mind safeguarding this with a check against dev->dev.parent, but > I would like to fix the drivers where relevant too, since > SET_NETDEV_DEV() should really be called, otherwise a number of things > just don't work I grepped for for register_netdev and think I saw a number of drivers which do not call SET_NETDEV_DEV. Again, perhaps they will never hit this path, but thought I should ask. Johan