From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 18429C388F7 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:12:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from merlin.infradead.org (merlin.infradead.org [205.233.59.134]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 83B68207E8 for ; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:12:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="c2kShovD" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 83B68207E8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=merlin.20170209; h=Sender:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post:List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=J/pp4ufXtBr896Q2NT0e4XljFYxjt6J3resyFkSf1KQ=; b=c2kShovD28530yoyJe5okLnO9 y1kgULFjEIyV/zpLgjj879+UCIPv+lD+lOMLzySFEIB5Ifs4TOxrHgjbqMw5FVzHf2XMUoovPctc4 NTw6+Amb50aJzDuwyAcRsIzXprldRd26ThWxqm5CzlSmV0vCDeN8kqNh7D/pFnWBxqytE1V+YNkqf ocfImikyyPWeR6NLKYC8aUmyDGtAB05N3rTR02IbaVdEhsPDovl3oe2G3nA5u4LSWKfuRnVyc9mLt QqqW1rtKtJbcq4fy59rrTa2cYv1Lq2X5M+bzsh6wjZg90zsSbIGUh5Wh8KLUBR8AlLiEY/kyLsfL8 yVBpZl5Zg==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=merlin.infradead.org) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kcQcM-0001TD-Ri; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:11:14 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by merlin.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kcQcK-0001Sg-4v for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:11:13 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D9A611D4; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 02:11:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from e120937-lin (unknown [172.31.20.19]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D51443F6CF; Tue, 10 Nov 2020 02:11:10 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 10:11:08 +0000 From: Cristian Marussi To: Qinglang Miao Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] firmware: arm_scmi: fix missing destroy_workqueue() Message-ID: <20201110101108.GC30029@e120937-lin> References: <20201110074221.41235-1-miaoqinglang@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20201110074221.41235-1-miaoqinglang@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.4 (2018-02-28) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20201110_051112_275309_D1649659 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.56 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Sudeep Holla Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Hi On Tue, Nov 10, 2020 at 03:42:21PM +0800, Qinglang Miao wrote: > destroy_workqueue seems necessary before return from > scmi_notification_init in the error handling case when > fails to do devm_kcalloc(). Fix this by simply moving > devm_kcalloc to the front. > > Fixes: bd31b249692e ("firmware: arm_scmi: Add notification dispatch and delivery") > Suggested-by: Cristian Marussi > Signed-off-by: Qinglang Miao > --- > v2: fix this problem by simply moving codes. > > drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c | 10 +++++----- > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c > index 2754f9d01636..fdb2cc95dfde 100644 > --- a/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c > +++ b/drivers/firmware/arm_scmi/notify.c > @@ -1468,17 +1468,17 @@ int scmi_notification_init(struct scmi_handle *handle) > ni->gid = gid; > ni->handle = handle; > > + ni->registered_protocols = devm_kcalloc(handle->dev, SCMI_MAX_PROTO, > + sizeof(char *), GFP_KERNEL); > + if (!ni->registered_protocols) > + goto err; > + > ni->notify_wq = alloc_workqueue("scmi_notify", > WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_FREEZABLE | WQ_SYSFS, > 0); > if (!ni->notify_wq) > goto err; > > - ni->registered_protocols = devm_kcalloc(handle->dev, SCMI_MAX_PROTO, > - sizeof(char *), GFP_KERNEL); > - if (!ni->registered_protocols) > - goto err; > - > mutex_init(&ni->pending_mtx); > hash_init(ni->pending_events_handlers); > Looks good to me. Just be aware that it seems you're patch is not based on top of sudeep/for-next/scmi at: b9ceca6be432 firmware: arm_scmi: Fix duplicate workqueue name whose top commit indeed changes the workqueue naming style: 1fc2dd1864c2b (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:40 +0100 1476) b9ceca6be4323 (Florian Fainelli 2020-10-13 19:17:37 -0700 1477) ni->notify_wq = alloc_workqueue(dev_name(handle->dev), bd31b249692e2 (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:42 +0100 1478) WQ_UNBOUND | WQ_FREEZABLE | WQ_SYSFS, bd31b249692e2 (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:42 +0100 1479) 0); bd31b249692e2 (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:42 +0100 1480) if (!ni->notify_wq) bd31b249692e2 (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:42 +0100 1481) goto err; bd31b249692e2 (Cristian Marussi 2020-07-01 16:53:42 +0100 1482) So I'm a bit worried it could fail to apply cleanly as it is, it would be better if possible to rebase it on top of for-next/scmi. Beside this Reviewed-by: Cristian Marussi Thanks Cristian > -- > 2.23.0 > > > _______________________________________________ > linux-arm-kernel mailing list > linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel