Re: v5.13-rcX regression - NULL pointer dereference - MFD and software node API

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 2:50 PM Dominik Brodowski
<linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Am Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 02:19:44PM +0300 schrieb Andy Shevchenko:
> > On Sun, Jun 20, 2021 at 11:36 AM Dominik Brodowski
> > <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Over a month ago, Andy Shevchenko reported and fixed a NULL pointer
> > > dereference issue introduced by commit
> > >         42e59982917a ("mfd: core: Add support for software nodes")
> > > in v5.13-rc1:
> > >         https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210510141552.57045-1-andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> > >
> > > A bisect shows that it is indeed commit 42e59982917a which causes boot to
> > > fail due to a NULL pointer dereference on my work laptop,
> >
> > Can you, please, be more specific? E.g. where may I find the ACPI dump
> > of your laptop, along with other information?
> > What you may prepare is (all run under root user)
> > 1. `acpidump -o laptop-$MODEL.dat` (the *.dat file)
> > 2. `grep -H 15 /sys/bus/acpi/devices/*/status`
> > 3. `dmesg`
> > 4. `cat /proc/iomem /proc/ioport`
> > 5. `lspci -nk -vv`
> >
> > (#2 and #3 are interesting to have in working and non-working cases)
> >
> > Perhaps a bug on the kernel bugzilla would be a good container for all these.
> >
> > Also it's not clear what exactly an Oops you have (I don't believe
> > it's the same).
>
> Thanks for taking a look at this issue. As it's actually a panic during
> boot which triggers before initramfs is ready, I can only provide the data
> for the "working case", i.e. with the patch causing the regression already
> reverted:
>
>         https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213511
>
> With commit 42e59982917a reverted, the system works just fine.

Is it possible to have any traces of the panic to be logged / photoed / etc?

> > > In my opinion, it is unfortunate that although it has been known for over a
> > > month that commit 42e59982917a is broken, the bugfix (though probably not
> > > far-reaching enough) has not yet progressed upstream.
> >
> > Which sounds like a narrow scope of the issue and supports the theory
> > of buggy tables. It may also be possible that some driver
>
> ... still, it's a regression, with a clear "git bisect" result :-(

I understand and I'm looking at this...

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko