[RFT PATCH v3 10/10] iio: Don't silently expect attribute types

[Matti Vaittinen]

On 10/9/22 20:38, Jonathan Cameron wrote:
> On Thu, 6 Oct 2022 15:53:52 +0300
> Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi Claudiu,
>>
>> On 10/6/22 11:35, Claudiu.Beznea at microchip.com wrote:
>>> On 03.10.2022 11:13, Matti Vaittinen wrote:
>>>> The iio_triggered_buffer_setup_ext() and the
>>>> devm_iio_kfifo_buffer_setup_ext() were changed by
>>>> commit 15097c7a1adc ("iio: buffer: wrap all buffer attributes into iio_dev_attr")
>>>> to silently expect that all attributes given in buffer_attrs array are
>>>> device-attributes. This expectation was not forced by the API - and some
>>>> drivers did register attributes created by IIO_CONST_ATTR().
>>>>
>>>> When using IIO_CONST_ATTRs the added attribute "wrapping" does not copy
>>>> the pointer to stored string constant and when the sysfs file is read the
>>>> kernel will access to invalid location.
>>>>
>>>> Change the function signatures to expect an array of iio_dev_attrs to
>>>> avoid similar errors in the future.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Matti Vaittinen <mazziesaccount at gmail.com>
>>>
>>> Tested-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea at microchip.com>
>>>
>>> on SAMA5D2
>>>    
>>
>> Thanks a ton for the testing! I do _really_ appreciate it :) I am now
>> slightly more confident regarding the fix here - and a lot more
>> confident that we do have an actual bug (as you explained in the reply
>> to the first RFT) :)
> 
> You analysis was sound, so I've long been convinced ;)
> 
> Anyhow, one more coming through...
> AD4130 v9 patch had same issue and so will also need updating with this
> patch if it lands before yours.
> 
> Other than that static macro being ugly (which I can't improve on!)
> all looks good to me, but I'll let it sit a while longer. If nothing
> else I want to rebase the fixes-togreg tree on rc1 before putting the first
> part of this series on top of it then letting them soak in next for
> a few days,

Thanks Jonathan.

Can you please ping me if you want me to rebase/rework the series? (I 
may combine this with the kx022a-series then, but naturally not all 
patches in the series need to be applied at once. Eg, fixes can be taken 
in faster, kx022a part can be iterated, iterated, iterated... ;] ).

Yours
	-- Matti

-- 
Matti Vaittinen
Linux kernel developer at ROHM Semiconductors
Oulu Finland

~~ When things go utterly wrong vim users can always type :help! ~~