linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] amba: bus: Drop dev_pm_domain

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAPDyKFq3TSsa9co2gcJOfR1YB+z3172ghejMLAvfmE9j6bb0gg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2025 13:23:27 +0100
From: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
To: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev>
Cc: linux@...linux.org.uk, chentao@...inos.cn, 
	claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com, rmk+kernel@...linux.org.uk, 
	lpieralisi@...nel.org, robin.murphy@....com, rafael@...nel.org, 
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] amba: bus: Drop dev_pm_domain_detach() call

On Tue, 4 Nov 2025 at 15:04, Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev> wrote:
>
> Hi, Ulf,
>
> On 8/27/25 14:35, Ulf Hansson wrote:
> > On Wed, 27 Aug 2025 at 12:03, Claudiu <claudiu.beznea@...on.dev> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
> >>
> >> Starting with commit f99508074e78 ("PM: domains: Detach on
> >> device_unbind_cleanup()"), there is no longer a need to call
> >> dev_pm_domain_detach() in the bus remove function. The
> >> device_unbind_cleanup() function now handles this to avoid
> >> invoking devres cleanup handlers while the PM domain is
> >> powered off, which could otherwise lead to failures as
> >> described in the above-mentioned commit.
> >>
> >> Drop the explicit dev_pm_domain_detach() call and rely instead
> >> on the flags passed to dev_pm_domain_attach() to power off the
> >> domain.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Claudiu Beznea <claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Ulf Hansson <ulf.hansson@...aro.org>
> >
> > If it helps, let me know if you want me to pick this up via my pmdomain tree.
>
> This wasn't picked up so far. Could you please take it through your tree if
> everything looks good?
>
> Thank you,
> Claudiu

Okay, I have picked this up via my pmdomain tree and queued it for
v6.19 on my next branch.

If anyone has objections, please let me know.

Kind regards
Uffe


> >
> > Kind regards
> > Uffe
> >
> >
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/amba/bus.c | 9 +++------
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/amba/bus.c b/drivers/amba/bus.c
> >> index 74e34a07ef72..952c45ca6e48 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/amba/bus.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/amba/bus.c
> >> @@ -291,15 +291,14 @@ static int amba_probe(struct device *dev)
> >>                 if (ret < 0)
> >>                         break;
> >>
> >> -               ret = dev_pm_domain_attach(dev, PD_FLAG_ATTACH_POWER_ON);
> >> +               ret = dev_pm_domain_attach(dev, PD_FLAG_ATTACH_POWER_ON |
> >> +                                               PD_FLAG_DETACH_POWER_OFF);
> >>                 if (ret)
> >>                         break;
> >>
> >>                 ret = amba_get_enable_pclk(pcdev);
> >> -               if (ret) {
> >> -                       dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, true);
> >> +               if (ret)
> >>                         break;
> >> -               }
> >>
> >>                 pm_runtime_get_noresume(dev);
> >>                 pm_runtime_set_active(dev);
> >> @@ -314,7 +313,6 @@ static int amba_probe(struct device *dev)
> >>                 pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> >>
> >>                 amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
> >> -               dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, true);
> >>         } while (0);
> >>
> >>         return ret;
> >> @@ -336,7 +334,6 @@ static void amba_remove(struct device *dev)
> >>         pm_runtime_put_noidle(dev);
> >>
> >>         amba_put_disable_pclk(pcdev);
> >> -       dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, true);
> >>  }
> >>
> >>  static void amba_shutdown(struct device *dev)
> >> --
> >> 2.43.0
> >>
> >
> >
>