[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c0f1d7b9-5923-75d6-cb57-bb4bd4635cd7@linaro.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2023 12:17:28 +0200
From: Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@...aro.org>
To: Icenowy Zheng <uwu@...nowy.me>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
Amit Kucheria <amitk@...nel.org>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@...el.com>,
Matthias Brugger <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
AngeloGioacchino Del Regno
<angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com>,
Kang Chen <void0red@...t.edu.cn>,
Dongliang Mu <dzm91@...t.edu.cn>
Cc: linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] thermal/drivers/mediatek: fix a regression affecting
other subsystems
On 22/07/2023 14:13, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
> 在 2023-06-13星期二的 10:44 +0200,Daniel Lezcano写道:
>> On 29/05/2023 18:20, Icenowy Zheng wrote:
>>> In the commit I reverted as the first commit of this patchset, the
>>> of_iomap function call, which allows multiple mapping of the same
>>> physical memory space, is replaced to calling devm_of_iomap, which
>>> registers exclusivity, and on my system (mt8173-elm), preventing
>>> display
>>> from working.
>>>
>>> So I reverted it, and to really solve the problem that the original
>>> commit wants to solve, I read the source of auxadc-thermal and
>>> realized
>>> that the address of these two memory blocks are not saved after
>>> probe,
>>> and they're only used when initializing the thermal sensors. This
>>> leads
>>> to my final fix, which is the second commit here, that adds
>>> of_iounmap
>>> just to the probe function.
>>>
>>> Icenowy Zheng (2):
>>> Revert "thermal/drivers/mediatek: Use devm_of_iomap to avoid
>>> resource
>>> leak in mtk_thermal_probe"
>>> thermal/drivers/mediatek: unmap foreign MMIO after probing
>>>
>>> drivers/thermal/mediatek/auxadc_thermal.c | 46 ++++++++++++------
>>> -----
>>> 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>>
>> I'll apply only the revert and let you revisit the patch 2 which
>> could
>> be improved.
>
> Sorry, is the first patch applied? I didn't see it in any kernel
> trees...
Yes, sorry, I got another patch meanwhile which provided the same revert
with more tags
https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230525121811.3360268-1-ricardo.canuelo@collabora.com
--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs
Follow Linaro: <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists