[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <77448b13-9233-20a8-5e68-a8830314c27d@web.de>
Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2020 08:42:08 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
Fugang Duan <fugang.duan@....com>, kernel@...gutronix.de,
linux-imx@....com, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Dong Aisheng <aisheng.dong@....com>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance in
lpi2c_imx_master_enable()
> pm_runtime_get_sync() increments the runtime PM usage counter even
> the call returns an error code. Thus a corresponding decrement is
> needed on the error handling path to keep the counter balanced.
>
> Fix this by adding the missed function call.
How do you think about a wording variant like the following?
Change description:
The PM runtime usage counter is incremented even if a call of
the function “pm_runtime_get_sync” failed. Thus decrement it also
in an error case so that the reference counting is kept consistent.
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists