linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RESEND 3/3] hwspinlock: omap: Use devm_hwspin_lock

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CADBw62okdejAcXcT23gUL4qLLFo5YhzisF8uSdoOOheoqv09-A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 25 Jan 2020 12:10:26 +0800
From:   Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@...il.com>
To:     Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...aro.org>
Cc:     Ohad Ben Cohen <ohad@...ery.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-remoteproc@...r.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 3/3] hwspinlock: omap: Use devm_hwspin_lock_register()
 to register hwlock controller

Hi Bjorn,

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 8:15 AM Bjorn Andersson
<bjorn.andersson@...aro.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue 07 Jan 19:14 PST 2020, Baolin Wang wrote:
>
> > Use devm_hwspin_lock_register() to register the hwlock controller instead of
> > unregistering the hwlock controller explicitly when removing the device.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Baolin Wang <baolin.wang7@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c |   13 ++-----------
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c b/drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c
> > index 3b05560..9e8a8c2 100644
> > --- a/drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c
> > +++ b/drivers/hwspinlock/omap_hwspinlock.c
> > @@ -131,8 +131,8 @@ static int omap_hwspinlock_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >       for (i = 0, hwlock = &bank->lock[0]; i < num_locks; i++, hwlock++)
> >               hwlock->priv = io_base + LOCK_BASE_OFFSET + sizeof(u32) * i;
> >
> > -     ret = hwspin_lock_register(bank, &pdev->dev, &omap_hwspinlock_ops,
> > -                                             base_id, num_locks);
> > +     ret = devm_hwspin_lock_register(&pdev->dev, bank, &omap_hwspinlock_ops,
> > +                                     base_id, num_locks);
> >       if (ret)
> >               goto runtime_err;
> >
> > @@ -148,15 +148,6 @@ static int omap_hwspinlock_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >
> >  static int omap_hwspinlock_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  {
> > -     struct hwspinlock_device *bank = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
> > -     int ret;
> > -
> > -     ret = hwspin_lock_unregister(bank);
> > -     if (ret) {
> > -             dev_err(&pdev->dev, "%s failed: %d\n", __func__, ret);
> > -             return ret;
> > -     }
> > -
>
> Relying on devm_hwspin_lock_register() to hwspin_lock_unregister() will
> mean that pm_runtime_disable() will now be called before the spinlocks
> are unregistered.

Yes, you are right. Thanks for catching this issue.