[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdXHT9y09L19j2K=oQ1W+7x=SE7MEyjj6r1i=DPcokvWzg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2020 09:26:47 +0200
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>
To: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@...il.com>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Navid Emamdoost <emamd001@....edu>,
Qiushi Wu <wu000273@....edu>, Kangjie Lu <kjlu@....edu>,
Stephen McCamant <smccaman@....edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gpio: rcar: handle pm_runtime_get_sync failure case
Hi Navid,
On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 4:50 AM Navid Emamdoost
<navid.emamdoost@...il.com> wrote:
> Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
> failure, causing incorrect ref count. Call pm_runtime_put if
> pm_runtime_get_sync fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@...il.com>
Thanks for your patch!
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-rcar.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-rcar.c
> @@ -250,8 +250,10 @@ static int gpio_rcar_request(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> int error;
>
> error = pm_runtime_get_sync(p->dev);
> - if (error < 0)
> + if (error < 0) {
> + pm_runtime_put(p->dev);
As per [1], I would like to see a call to pm_runtime_put_noidle() instead.
[1] http://lore.kernel.org/r/CAJZ5v0i87NGcy9+kxubScdPDyByr8ypQWcGgBFn+V-wDd69BHQ@mail.gmail.com
> return error;
> + }
>
> error = pinctrl_gpio_request(chip->base + offset);
> if (error)
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists