[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7249d9608f41e4528c87c2b1c464d615@codeaurora.org>
Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 18:34:05 -0700
From: hemantk@...eaurora.org
To: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
Cc: manivannan.sadhasivam@...aro.org, linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-msm-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] bus: mhi: core: Make sure to powerdown if
mhi_sync_power_up fails
On 2020-04-07 09:50, Jeffrey Hugo wrote:
> Powerdown is necessary if mhi_sync_power_up fails due to a timeout, to
> clean up the resources. Otherwise a BUG could be triggered when
> attempting to clean up MSIs because the IRQ is still active from a
> request_irq().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffrey Hugo <jhugo@...eaurora.org>
> ---
> drivers/bus/mhi/core/pm.c | 6 +++++-
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/pm.c b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/pm.c
> index 3285c9e..fbffc6b 100644
> --- a/drivers/bus/mhi/core/pm.c
> +++ b/drivers/bus/mhi/core/pm.c
> @@ -922,7 +922,11 @@ int mhi_sync_power_up(struct mhi_controller
> *mhi_cntrl)
> MHI_PM_IN_ERROR_STATE(mhi_cntrl->pm_state),
> msecs_to_jiffies(mhi_cntrl->timeout_ms));
>
> - return (MHI_IN_MISSION_MODE(mhi_cntrl->ee)) ? 0 : -EIO;
> + ret = (MHI_IN_MISSION_MODE(mhi_cntrl->ee)) ? 0 : -EIO;
Does it make sense to return -ETIMEDOUT instead of -EIO if device fails
to move to mission mode?
Controller can use this info as mhi_async_power_up() would not return
-ETIMEDOUT.
> + if (ret)
> + mhi_power_down(mhi_cntrl, false);
> +
> + return ret;
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(mhi_sync_power_up);
Powered by blists - more mailing lists