Re: [PATCH v4] misc: fastrpc: check qcom_scm_assign_mem() return in rpmsg_probe

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Jan 13, 2026 at 10:34:45PM +0800, Xingjing Deng wrote:
> In the SDSP probe path, qcom_scm_assign_mem() is used to assign the
> reserved memory to the configured VMIDs, but its return value was not
> checked.
> 
> Fail the probe if the SCM call fails to avoid continuing with an
> unexpected/incorrect memory permission configuration
> 
> Fixes: c3c0363bc72d4 ("misc: fastrpc: support complete DMA pool access to the DSP")
> Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx # 6.11-rc1
> Signed-off-by: Xingjing Deng <xjdeng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> ---
> 
> v4:
> - Format the indentation
> - Link to v3: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20260113084352.72itrloj5w7qb5o3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> 
> v3:
> - Add missing linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx to cc list.
> - Standarlize changelog placement/format.
> - Link to v2: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20260113063618.e2ke47gy3hnfi67e@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#t
> 
> v2:
> - Add Fixes: and Cc: stable tags.
> - Link to v1: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-msm/20260113022550.4029635-1-xjdeng@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u
> 
> Signed-off-by: Xingjing Deng <xjdeng@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  drivers/misc/fastrpc.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> index cbb12db110b3..9c41b51d80ee 100644
> --- a/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> +++ b/drivers/misc/fastrpc.c
> @@ -2339,10 +2339,10 @@ static int fastrpc_rpmsg_probe(struct rpmsg_device *rpdev)
>  			src_perms = BIT(QCOM_SCM_VMID_HLOS);
>  
>  			err = qcom_scm_assign_mem(res.start, resource_size(&res), &src_perms,
> -				    data->vmperms, data->vmcount);
> +				    				data->vmperms, data->vmcount);

I'm all for coding style cleanups, but don't mix that into a patch that
does something else.  Also, please indent this properly, checkpatch
should complain about this.


>  			if (err) {
>  				dev_err(rdev, "Failed to assign memory phys 0x%llx size 0x%llx err %d",
> -					res.start, resource_size(&res), err);
> +						res.start, resource_size(&res), err);

Same here, that's not right.

And I don't see the real change here, are you sure you generated this
properly?  This just looks like coding style cleanups, which do not
match the changelog text.

thanks,

greg k-h