[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1436406493.15417.4.camel@mtksdaap41>
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 09:48:13 +0800
From: Koro Chen <koro.chen@...iatek.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
CC: <perex@...ex.cz>, <tiwai@...e.de>, <lgirdwood@...il.com>,
<srv_heupstream@...iatek.com>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<alsa-devel@...a-project.org>, <bardliao@...ltek.com>,
<oder_chiou@...ltek.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] ASoC: rt5645: Fix missing free_irq
On Wed, 2015-07-08 at 12:14 +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 04:25:50PM +0800, Koro Chen wrote:
>
> > The driver does not free irq if snd_soc_register_codec fails.
> > It does not return error when request irq failed, either.
> > Fix this by using devm_request_threaded_irq(), and returns when error.
>
> Unfortunately this isn't safe...
>
> > - if (i2c->irq)
> > - free_irq(i2c->irq, rt5645);
> > -
> > cancel_delayed_work_sync(&rt5645->jack_detect_work);
>
> This work item is queued up by the interrupt handler so we need to
> unregister the interrupt before we cancel any pending work otherwise
> it's possible that the interrupt may fire after we cancelled the work.
Thank you for seeing this, I didn't notice the delayed work.
Do you think I should use devm_request_threaded_irq(), and change
free_irq to devm_free_irq in remove? Or I should keep the original
request_thread_irq(), and just add a free_irq() during probe failed?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists