[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <44768ceb-ee7c-85f2-6091-ec6bcd06ab54@web.de>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 09:40:53 +0200
From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@....de>
To: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...nel.org>, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
kernel@...gutronix.de, linux-imx@....com,
linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Aisheng Dong <aisheng.dong@....com>,
Dinghao Liu <dinghao.liu@....edu.cn>,
Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <s.hauer@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <festevam@...il.com>,
Andy Duan <fugang.duan@....com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>,
Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
Aditya Pakki <pakki001@....edu>
Subject: Re: [v3] i2c: imx-lpi2c: Fix runtime PM imbalance on error
> I started a seperate thread:
>
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2020/6/14/76
>
> Still, on-going discussion if the proper fix is to remove the error check.
I find that a bit of additional information can make such a link safer.
RFC: a failing pm_runtime_get increases the refcnt?
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200614090751.GA2878@kunai/
How will the clarification of corresponding software aspects evolve further?
Regards,
Markus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists