| Message ID | 1500375436-9435-3-git-send-email-j-keerthy@ti.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
Hi Keerthy, On 07/18/2017 05:57 AM, Keerthy wrote: > Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the > return value appropriately. > > Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > index 2c88054..932f270 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; > > ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); > + if (ret) > + goto err; > + > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > if (ret) { > - ctrl_num = 0; > - bank_base = 0; > - return ret; > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); This is not needed, driver core will set this automatically if probe fails. > + goto err; > } > > - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > return 0; > + > +err: > + ctrl_num = 0; > + bank_base = 0; Same comments as on Patch 1. regards Suman
On Tuesday 18 July 2017 10:24 PM, Suman Anna wrote: > Hi Keerthy, > > On 07/18/2017 05:57 AM, Keerthy wrote: >> Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the >> return value appropriately. >> >> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> index 2c88054..932f270 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; >> >> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); >> + if (ret) >> + goto err; >> + >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >> + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >> if (ret) { >> - ctrl_num = 0; >> - bank_base = 0; >> - return ret; >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); > > This is not needed, driver core will set this automatically if probe fails. okay. I will remove this. > >> + goto err; >> } >> >> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >> - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >> return 0; >> + >> +err: >> + ctrl_num = 0; >> + bank_base = 0; > > Same comments as on Patch 1. Yup will fix this as i have done with Patch 1. > > regards > Suman >
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:27:14PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the > return value appropriately. > > Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> > --- > drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > index 2c88054..932f270 100644 > --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; > > ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); > + if (ret) > + goto err; > + > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > if (ret) { > - ctrl_num = 0; > - bank_base = 0; > - return ret; > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); > + goto err; > } > > - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > return 0; There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. Johan
On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:27:14PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >> Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the >> return value appropriately. >> >> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- >> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> index 2c88054..932f270 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >> @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >> chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; >> >> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); >> + if (ret) >> + goto err; >> + >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >> + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >> if (ret) { >> - ctrl_num = 0; >> - bank_base = 0; >> - return ret; >> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); >> + goto err; >> } >> >> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >> - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >> return 0; > > There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() > in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. > > Johan >
On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: > > > On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:27:14PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>> Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the >>> return value appropriately. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> >>> --- >>> drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>> index 2c88054..932f270 100644 >>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>> @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>> chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; >>> >>> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); >>> + if (ret) >>> + goto err; >>> + >>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >>> + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >>> if (ret) { >>> - ctrl_num = 0; >>> - bank_base = 0; >>> - return ret; >>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); >>> + goto err; >>> } >>> >>> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >>> - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >>> return 0; >> >> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() >> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. > > Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. This is already fixed in the latest kernel: commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 Regards, Keerthy > >> >> Johan >>
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > > > On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: > > > > > > On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:27:14PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > >>> Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the > >>> return value appropriately. > >>> > >>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> > >>> --- > >>> drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- > >>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >>> > >>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > >>> index 2c88054..932f270 100644 > >>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > >>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c > >>> @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > >>> chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; > >>> > >>> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); > >>> + if (ret) > >>> + goto err; > >>> + > >>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > >>> + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > >>> if (ret) { > >>> - ctrl_num = 0; > >>> - bank_base = 0; > >>> - return ret; > >>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); > >>> + goto err; > >>> } > >>> > >>> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); > >>> - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); > >>> return 0; > >> > >> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() > >> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. > > > > Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. > > This is already fixed in the latest kernel: > > commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 > Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> > Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. Johan
On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >> >> >> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >>>> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 04:27:14PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>>>> Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the >>>>> return value appropriately. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> >>>>> --- >>>>> drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- >>>>> 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>>>> index 2c88054..932f270 100644 >>>>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>>>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c >>>>> @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>> chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; >>>>> >>>>> ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); >>>>> + if (ret) >>>>> + goto err; >>>>> + >>>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >>>>> + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >>>>> if (ret) { >>>>> - ctrl_num = 0; >>>>> - bank_base = 0; >>>>> - return ret; >>>>> + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); >>>>> + goto err; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); >>>>> - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); >>>>> return 0; >>>> >>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() >>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. >>> >>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. >> >> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: >> >> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 >> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> >> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 > > That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during > probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in probe err path. > > Johan >
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:32:27PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > >> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: > >>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() > >>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. > >>> > >>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. > >> > >> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: > >> > >> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 > >> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> > >> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 > > > > That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during > > probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. > > Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in > probe err path. No, you need to balance it on driver unbind, that is, in a new remove() callback. Johan
On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:35 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:32:27PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >> On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>>> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>>>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() >>>>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. >>>>> >>>>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. >>>> >>>> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: >>>> >>>> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 >>>> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> >>>> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 >>> >>> That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during >>> probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. >> >> Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in >> probe err path. > > No, you need to balance it on driver unbind, that is, in a new remove() > callback. Okay yes davinci_gpio_irq_setup is the last call in probe so no need of that in probe error path. I will add a new remove() to balance. Thanks, Keerthy > > Johan >
On 07/20/2017 05:05 AM, Johan Hovold wrote: > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:32:27PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >> On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>>> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>>>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() >>>>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. >>>>> >>>>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. >>>> >>>> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: >>>> >>>> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 >>>> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> >>>> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 >>> >>> That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during >>> probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. >> >> Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in >> probe err path. > > No, you need to balance it on driver unbind, that is, in a new remove() > callback. > Sry, but manual driver unbind for this driver is really smth unexpected ;( So, I'm not sure if it need to be implemented and even yes - it should not be a part of this patch. Probably, smth like "convert driver to be a module". By the way, I've tried to unbind gpio-omap, result - failure (expected), as unbind does not take into account module refcnt state.
On Friday 21 July 2017 03:04 AM, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > > > On 07/20/2017 05:05 AM, Johan Hovold wrote: >> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:32:27PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>> On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >>>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: >>>>> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: >>>>>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: >> >>>>>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() >>>>>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. >>>>>> >>>>>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. >>>>> >>>>> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: >>>>> >>>>> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 >>>>> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> >>>>> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 >>>> >>>> That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during >>>> probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. >>> >>> Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in >>> probe err path. >> >> No, you need to balance it on driver unbind, that is, in a new remove() >> callback. >> > > Sry, but manual driver unbind for this driver is really smth unexpected ;( > So, I'm not sure if it need to be implemented and even yes - it should not be > a part of this patch. Probably, smth like "convert driver to be a module". > The GPIO_DAVINCI config is bool. Thanks for checking on that Grygorii. > By the way, I've tried to unbind gpio-omap, result - failure (expected), > as unbind does not take into account module refcnt state. Okay. > >
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 04:34:42PM -0500, Grygorii Strashko wrote: > > > On 07/20/2017 05:05 AM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 03:32:27PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > >> On Thursday 20 July 2017 03:20 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > >>> On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 02:40:37PM +0530, Keerthy wrote: > >>>> On Thursday 20 July 2017 12:14 PM, Keerthy wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday 19 July 2017 04:40 PM, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > >>>>>> There's a separate but related bug here too as the clk_prepare_enable() > >>>>>> in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() is never balanced on driver unbind. > >>>>> > >>>>> Yes Johan. I will send that as a separate patch. > >>>> > >>>> This is already fixed in the latest kernel: > >>>> > >>>> commit 6dc0048cff988858254fcc26becfc1e9753efa79 > >>>> Author: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@gmail.com> > >>>> Date: Tue May 23 14:48:57 2017 +0530 > >>> > >>> That change only handles errors in davinci_gpio_irq_setup() (i.e. during > >>> probe) and not the imbalance at driver unbind that I was referring to. > >> > >> Okay got it. One more clk_unprepare_disable() call needs to be there in > >> probe err path. > > > > No, you need to balance it on driver unbind, that is, in a new remove() > > callback. > > > > Sry, but manual driver unbind for this driver is really smth unexpected ;( It certainly wouldn't be something often used (e.g. besides during development) but that doesn't mean it should not be implemented. > So, I'm not sure if it need to be implemented and even yes - it should not be > a part of this patch. That's why I said "separate, but related" above. > Probably, smth like "convert driver to be a module". > > By the way, I've tried to unbind gpio-omap, result - failure (expected), > as unbind does not take into account module refcnt state. Indeed. We also have CONFIG_DEBUG_TEST_DRIVER_REMOVE which would try to unbind this driver during probe if enabled. Getting into the habit of properly cleaning up allocated and enabled resources is only a good thing; it shows that the author has thought this through and serves as documentation of what needs to be released in both probe error paths and driver unbind callbacks. Assumptions also change over time (e.g. deferred probe and CONFIG_DEBUG_TEST_DRIVER_REMOVE), and by not taking such shortcuts we are also preventing incomplete code from being copied and reproduced in other drivers (e.g. on hotpluggable buses). So, just add the remove callback (in a separate patch) and everything is good. Thanks, Johan
diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c index 2c88054..932f270 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c @@ -233,15 +233,23 @@ static int davinci_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) chips->regs[bank] = gpio_base + offset_array[bank]; ret = devm_gpiochip_add_data(dev, &chips->chip, chips); + if (ret) + goto err; + + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); + ret = davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); if (ret) { - ctrl_num = 0; - bank_base = 0; - return ret; + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL); + goto err; } - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, chips); - davinci_gpio_irq_setup(pdev); return 0; + +err: + ctrl_num = 0; + bank_base = 0; + + return ret; } /*--------------------------------------------------------------------------*/
Currently davinci_gpio_irq_setup return value is ignored. Handle the return value appropriately. Signed-off-by: Keerthy <j-keerthy@ti.com> --- drivers/gpio/gpio-davinci.c | 18 +++++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)