[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y87PWaFFpHeW5YLv@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2023 20:18:01 +0200
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
acpica-devel@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] ACPI: video: Fix refcounting in
apple_gmux_backlight_present()
On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 06:46:44PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> On 1/23/23 18:10, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > acpi_dev_get_first_match_dev() gets ACPI device with the bumped
> > refcount. The caller must drop it when it's done.
> >
> > Fix ACPI device refcounting in apple_gmux_backlight_present().
...
> Thank you for your work on this, much appreciated and I like
> the new acpi_get_first_match_physical_node().
>
> But I don't think this patch is a good idea. There is a
> regression related to apple_gmux_backlight_present()
> with a patch-set fixing it pending.
>
> And that patch-set actually removes this function. Adding
> a fix for this real, but not really important leak now,
> will just make backporting the actual fix harder.
>
> So I would prefer for this patch to not go in and to
> go for (a to be submitted v2) of the patch-set fixing
> the regression right away instead.
Maybe I missed something, but I noticed that you actually moved (not killed)
the code which is currently in this function. If it's the case, I prefer my
fix to be imported first.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists