All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: remove __exit annotation
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 15:54:11 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141015155411.GA15770@saruman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543E962C.2050505@ti.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2176 bytes --]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 06:43:40PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> Somehow omapfb device is still unbound from the driver, as I can then
> >> bind it again, causing probe to be called. Which breaks everything.
> >>
> >> I would've thought that unbinding is not possible if remove is missing,
> >> but that doesn't seem to be the case. I guess it just means that remove
> >> is not called when the driver & device are unbound.
> > 
> > if no remove it provided on platform_driver structure, platform bus
> > assumes you have nothing to do on your ->remove(), so you end up leaking
> > all resources you allocated on ->probe() (unless you *really* don't need
> > to do anything on ->remove).
> 
> Yep. That's quite odd, still. grep shows quite many uses of __exit_p(),
> and all for remove callback. So, if you have something to release in
> remove(), you should set it always, for both module and built-in. And if
> you don't have anything to release, you would always just set .release
> to NULL.
> 
> I mean, what's the use case for __exit_p()? With a quick glance, at
> least some of the other users also use __exit_p() the same way omapdss
> does (i.e. in the wrong way).

__exit_p() meant something else a few years back, perhaps those were
left over from some tree-wide cleanups.

> >> We have 18 __exit_p()s in omapdss and related drivers. I guess they are
> >> all broken the same way.
> > 
> > yup, I should've grepped.
> > 
> >> Note that omapfb unbind & bind does not work even with this patch, but
> >> results in a crash as some old state is left into omapdss. The same
> >> happens also with unloading and loading omapfb module (but keeping
> >> omapdss module loaded).
> > 
> > It worked fine for me. I unbound and bound omapfb multiple times.
> 
> Hmm, ok. Odd, the bug was quite clear and I think it should happen every
> time. Well, I was using omap4. If you used AM4xx, that's basically omap3
> DSS. Maybe there's a diff there.

could very well be :-)

> >> So there seems to be more issues around this.
> > 
> > quite a few more, I'd say
> 
> Yep, I'll have a look at this.

alright

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
To: Tomi Valkeinen <tomi.valkeinen@ti.com>
Cc: balbi@ti.com,
	Linux OMAP Mailing List <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	Tony Lindgren <tony@atomide.com>,
	Benoit Cousson <bcousson@baylibre.com>,
	Linux ARM Kernel Mailing List
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	linux-fbdev@vger.kernel.org, Darren Etheridge <detheridge@ti.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: remove __exit annotation
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:54:11 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141015155411.GA15770@saruman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543E962C.2050505@ti.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2176 bytes --]

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 06:43:40PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> Somehow omapfb device is still unbound from the driver, as I can then
> >> bind it again, causing probe to be called. Which breaks everything.
> >>
> >> I would've thought that unbinding is not possible if remove is missing,
> >> but that doesn't seem to be the case. I guess it just means that remove
> >> is not called when the driver & device are unbound.
> > 
> > if no remove it provided on platform_driver structure, platform bus
> > assumes you have nothing to do on your ->remove(), so you end up leaking
> > all resources you allocated on ->probe() (unless you *really* don't need
> > to do anything on ->remove).
> 
> Yep. That's quite odd, still. grep shows quite many uses of __exit_p(),
> and all for remove callback. So, if you have something to release in
> remove(), you should set it always, for both module and built-in. And if
> you don't have anything to release, you would always just set .release
> to NULL.
> 
> I mean, what's the use case for __exit_p()? With a quick glance, at
> least some of the other users also use __exit_p() the same way omapdss
> does (i.e. in the wrong way).

__exit_p() meant something else a few years back, perhaps those were
left over from some tree-wide cleanups.

> >> We have 18 __exit_p()s in omapdss and related drivers. I guess they are
> >> all broken the same way.
> > 
> > yup, I should've grepped.
> > 
> >> Note that omapfb unbind & bind does not work even with this patch, but
> >> results in a crash as some old state is left into omapdss. The same
> >> happens also with unloading and loading omapfb module (but keeping
> >> omapdss module loaded).
> > 
> > It worked fine for me. I unbound and bound omapfb multiple times.
> 
> Hmm, ok. Odd, the bug was quite clear and I think it should happen every
> time. Well, I was using omap4. If you used AM4xx, that's basically omap3
> DSS. Maybe there's a diff there.

could very well be :-)

> >> So there seems to be more issues around this.
> > 
> > quite a few more, I'd say
> 
> Yep, I'll have a look at this.

alright

-- 
balbi

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 819 bytes --]

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: balbi@ti.com (Felipe Balbi)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: remove __exit annotation
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 10:54:11 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141015155411.GA15770@saruman> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <543E962C.2050505@ti.com>

Hi,

On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 06:43:40PM +0300, Tomi Valkeinen wrote:
> >> Somehow omapfb device is still unbound from the driver, as I can then
> >> bind it again, causing probe to be called. Which breaks everything.
> >>
> >> I would've thought that unbinding is not possible if remove is missing,
> >> but that doesn't seem to be the case. I guess it just means that remove
> >> is not called when the driver & device are unbound.
> > 
> > if no remove it provided on platform_driver structure, platform bus
> > assumes you have nothing to do on your ->remove(), so you end up leaking
> > all resources you allocated on ->probe() (unless you *really* don't need
> > to do anything on ->remove).
> 
> Yep. That's quite odd, still. grep shows quite many uses of __exit_p(),
> and all for remove callback. So, if you have something to release in
> remove(), you should set it always, for both module and built-in. And if
> you don't have anything to release, you would always just set .release
> to NULL.
> 
> I mean, what's the use case for __exit_p()? With a quick glance, at
> least some of the other users also use __exit_p() the same way omapdss
> does (i.e. in the wrong way).

__exit_p() meant something else a few years back, perhaps those were
left over from some tree-wide cleanups.

> >> We have 18 __exit_p()s in omapdss and related drivers. I guess they are
> >> all broken the same way.
> > 
> > yup, I should've grepped.
> > 
> >> Note that omapfb unbind & bind does not work even with this patch, but
> >> results in a crash as some old state is left into omapdss. The same
> >> happens also with unloading and loading omapfb module (but keeping
> >> omapdss module loaded).
> > 
> > It worked fine for me. I unbound and bound omapfb multiple times.
> 
> Hmm, ok. Odd, the bug was quite clear and I think it should happen every
> time. Well, I was using omap4. If you used AM4xx, that's basically omap3
> DSS. Maybe there's a diff there.

could very well be :-)

> >> So there seems to be more issues around this.
> > 
> > quite a few more, I'd say
> 
> Yep, I'll have a look at this.

alright

-- 
balbi
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 819 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/attachments/20141015/9c26373d/attachment.sig>

  reply	other threads:[~2014-10-15 15:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 52+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2014-10-14 18:28 [PATCH 1/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: remove __exit annotation Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28 ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28 ` [PATCH 2/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: add missing MODULE_ALIAS() Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:34   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:34     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:34     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 12:46     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:46       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:46       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 14:37       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:37         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:37         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 12:20   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:20     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:20     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 14:38     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:38       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:38       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 15:45       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 15:45         ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 15:45         ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-14 18:28 ` [PATCH 3/3] arm: boot: dts: am437x-sk: fix lcd enable pin mux data Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-14 18:28   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 12:24   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:24     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:24     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-12-04 14:43     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 14:43       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 14:43       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 15:05       ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 15:05         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 15:05         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 15:10       ` [PATCH] " Felipe Balbi
2014-12-04 15:10         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-12-10 16:31         ` Tony Lindgren
2014-12-10 16:31           ` Tony Lindgren
2014-10-15 12:13 ` [PATCH 1/3] video: fbdev: omap2: omapfb: remove __exit annotation Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:13   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 12:13   ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 14:41   ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:41     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 14:41     ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 15:43     ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 15:43       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 15:43       ` Tomi Valkeinen
2014-10-15 15:54       ` Felipe Balbi [this message]
2014-10-15 15:54         ` Felipe Balbi
2014-10-15 15:54         ` Felipe Balbi

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20141015155411.GA15770@saruman \
    --to=balbi@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.