Re: [PATCH] rtc: bd70528: properly enable wakeup

[sashiko-bot@kernel.org]

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] The return value of devm_pm_set_wake_irq() is ignored, which can result in a silent failure to enable wakeup.
--

commit 145fe15d42adcccef8370937c9cb325de30fe4ff
Author: Andreas Kemnade <andreas@kemnade.info>

rtc: bd70528: properly enable wakeup

This commit specifies the wakeup irq for the RTC alarm to ensure wakeup
works reliably, rather than relying on the power button's wakeup
configuration.

> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-bd70528.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-bd70528.c
> index 482810b61495d..dc86882562abd 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-bd70528.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-bd70528.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -320,6 +321,7 @@ static int bd70528_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>  	device_set_wakeup_capable(&pdev->dev, true);
>  	device_wakeup_enable(&pdev->dev);
> +	devm_pm_set_wake_irq(&pdev->dev, irq);

[Severity: Medium]
Is it safe to ignore the return value of devm_pm_set_wake_irq() here?

If this fails (for instance, due to -ENOMEM during the internal kzalloc() or
devm_add_action_or_reset() calls), the wakeup IRQ configuration will be
silently aborted.

The probe function would then continue and succeed, leaving the device
without wakeup capabilities. Should this return value be checked and
propagated to prevent a silent failure?

>  
>  	rtc = devm_rtc_allocate_device(&pdev->dev);
>  	if (IS_ERR(rtc)) {

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260910092558.1008998-1-andreas@kemnade.info?part=1