netdev - Re: [PATCH] can: c_can: move runtime PM enable/disable to c_can

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <CAA5qM4Di1J7oPK3JrP8o++JUoBqkQ-wDzmwrBaT+9mmpCgK+=w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Mar 2021 21:55:51 -0500
From:   Tong Zhang <ztong0001@...il.com>
To:     Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>
Cc:     Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>,
        Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>,
        YueHaibing <yuehaibing@...wei.com>,
        Zhang Qilong <zhangqilong3@...wei.com>,
        linux-can@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: c_can: move runtime PM enable/disable to c_can_platform

On Mon, Mar 1, 2021 at 2:49 PM Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de> wrote:
>
> On 28.02.2021 23:15:48, Tong Zhang wrote:
> > Currently doing modprobe c_can_pci will make kernel complain
> > "Unbalanced pm_runtime_enable!", this is caused by pm_runtime_enable()
> > called before pm is initialized in register_candev() and doing so will
>
> I don't see where register_candev() is doing any pm related
> initialization.
>
> > also cause it to enable twice.
>
> > This fix is similar to 227619c3ff7c, move those pm_enable/disable code to
> > c_can_platform.
>
> As I understand 227619c3ff7c ("can: m_can: move runtime PM
> enable/disable to m_can_platform"), PCI devices automatically enable PM,
> when the "PCI device is added".

Hi Marc,
Thanks for the comments. I thinks you are right -- I was mislead by the trace --
I have corrected the commit log along with the indent fix in v2 patch.
Thanks again for your help,
- Tong

>
> Please clarify the above point, otherwise the code looks OK, small
> nitpick inline: