[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151028065339.GE3041@vkoul-mobl.iind.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Oct 2015 15:53:41 +0900
From: Vinod Koul <vinod.koul@...el.com>
To: Jon Hunter <jonathanh@...dia.com>
Cc: Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@...afoo.de>,
Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>,
Stephen Warren <swarren@...dotorg.org>,
Thierry Reding <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
Alexandre Courbot <gnurou@...il.com>,
dmaengine@...r.kernel.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] dmaengine: tegra-apb: Disable interrupts on removal
On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 11:57:02AM +0100, Jon Hunter wrote:
> >>> How about just calling free_irq()? That's how you'd typically handle this.
> >>
> >> Yes, however, the interrupt is requested by devm_request_irq(). I guess
> >> I could call devm_free_irq() here?
> >
> > Just use request_irq() instead of devm_request_irq(). You have the same
> > issue on the error path in the probe function anyway and also need to add
> > the free_irq() before the tasklet_kill() there as well.
>
> I was wondering about that but the tasklets should never be scheduled if
> the probe does not succeed, so I think it is ok.
This is actually very racy, if probe fails but due to devm_ calls your irq
is alive till it freed by core
And a faulty device triggering irq can complicate matters, so for irq IMHO
we don't get much benefit with devm_ variant
--
~Vinod
--
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