[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3f5b93d7-ee40-bb1a-2cfb-49fa193e2b9d@atmel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 14:54:30 +0100
From: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
To: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
CC: <linux@...tdown.ru>, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>,
Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...e-electrons.com>,
Boris BREZILLON <boris.brezillon@...e-electrons.com>,
linux-spi <linux-spi@...r.kernel.org>,
Ludovic Desroches <ludovic.desroches@...el.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
Wenyou Yang <wenyou.yang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] spi: atmel: use managed resource for gpio chip select
Le 21/09/2016 à 10:20, Geert Uytterhoeven a écrit :
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 9:55 AM, Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com> wrote:
>> Use the managed gpio CS pin request so that we avoid having trouble
>> in the cleanup code.
>> In fact, if module was configured with DT, cleanup code released
>> invalid pin. Since resource wasn't freed, module cannot be reinserted.
>>
>> Reported-by: Alexander Morozov <linux@...tdown.ru>
>> Signed-off-by: Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c | 5 ++---
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c b/drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c
>> index 8feac599e9ab..4e3f2345844a 100644
>> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c
>> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-atmel.c
>> @@ -1248,7 +1248,8 @@ static int atmel_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
>> return -ENOMEM;
>>
>> if (as->use_cs_gpios) {
>> - ret = gpio_request(npcs_pin, dev_name(&spi->dev));
>> + ret = devm_gpio_request(&spi->dev,
>> + npcs_pin, dev_name(&spi->dev));
>
> Note that spi_master.setup() can be called multiple times during the lifetime
> of the spi_device.
Sure, this is what I read in include/linux/spi/spi.h "It's always safe
to call this unless transfers are pending on the device whose settings
are being modified."
It also means that the whole memory allocation for devices that is done
a few lines above this gpio request is also completely wrong... This
function needs a serious refactoring.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Best regards,
>> if (ret) {
>> kfree(asd);
>> return ret;
>> @@ -1471,13 +1472,11 @@ static int atmel_spi_transfer_one_message(struct spi_master *master,
>> static void atmel_spi_cleanup(struct spi_device *spi)
>> {
>> struct atmel_spi_device *asd = spi->controller_state;
>> - unsigned gpio = (unsigned long) spi->controller_data;
>>
>> if (!asd)
>> return;
>>
>> spi->controller_state = NULL;
>> - gpio_free(gpio);
>> kfree(asd);
>> }
>
> Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
>
> Geert
>
> --
> Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@...ux-m68k.org
>
> In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
> when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
> -- Linus Torvalds
>
--
Nicolas Ferre
Powered by blists - more mailing lists