Hi, Sashiko found issues, not introduced by your patch, but still. I curated the list and left only those which I think are valid. Do you have time to look at these issues? Thank you and happy hacking, Wolfram > Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s) to consider: > > Pre-existing issues: > - [High] Asynchronous pm_runtime_put() is used instead of pm_runtime_put_sync() before runtime PM is disabled, potentially leaving the device powered on. > - [High] If the optional 'xtal' clock is missing, readl_poll_timeout() loops forever with a 0 timeout, risking a boot hang. > - [High] The driver's `remove` callback prematurely disables hardware interrupts and drops the runtime PM reference while the RTC device is still fully registered. > -- > > commit b7f73c7d0932a6e78b12419c5912ad3243637b8f > Author: Lad Prabhakar > rtc: rzn1: Use temporary variable for struct device > > This patch simplifies the rzn1_rtc_probe function by using a local temporary > variable for the struct device pointer. This avoids repeated dereferences of > pdev->dev throughout the function. > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c > > index bc6af59744e48..25cad9213147d 100644 > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-rzn1.c > [ ... ] > > if (IS_ERR(xtal)) { > > ret = PTR_ERR(xtal); > > goto dis_runtime_pm; > [ ... ] > > @@ -486,18 +487,18 @@ static int rzn1_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > [ ... ] > > device_init_wakeup(dev, true); > > > > ret = devm_rtc_register_device(rtc->rtcdev); > > [Severity: High] > This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does registering the RTC > device using devm_rtc_register_device() create a race condition during > teardown? > > In rzn1_rtc_remove(), the driver manually disables interrupts and calls > pm_runtime_put() before devres has unregistered the RTC device: > > writel(0, rtc->base + RZN1_RTC_CTL1); > pm_runtime_put(&pdev->dev); > > Could userspace still interact with the RTC during this window via ioctls > or sysfs, potentially causing synchronous bus faults since the hardware is > already suspended? Should teardown be bound using > devm_add_action_or_reset() to guarantee correct reverse execution order? [wsa] Or maybe not use devm then? > > > if (ret) > > @@ -506,7 +507,7 @@ static int rzn1_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > return 0; > > > > dis_runtime_pm: > > - pm_runtime_put(&pdev->dev); > > + pm_runtime_put(dev); > > [Severity: High] > This is a pre-existing issue, but does using pm_runtime_put() here (and in > rzn1_rtc_remove) leave the device powered on indefinitely? > > Since devm_pm_runtime_enable(dev) schedules pm_runtime_disable() to > execute during devres cleanup, calling pm_runtime_put() only queues an > asynchronous idle check. The immediate return triggers devres cleanup, > which executes a barrier that explicitly cancels pending async operations. > > Should this use pm_runtime_put_sync() instead to ensure the device is > synchronously suspended before teardown? > > > return ret; > > } > > -- > Sashiko AI review ยท https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260615154805.1619693-1-prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@bp.renesas.com?part=9