Re: [PATCH] spi: tegra114: missing put on pm_runtime_get_sync failure

[Jon Hunter <jonathanh-DDmLM1+adcrQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>]

On 02/06/2020 05:55, Navid Emamdoost wrote:
> the call to pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even 
> in case of failure leading to incorrect ref count.
> Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>
> ---
>  drivers/spi/spi-tegra114.c | 3 +++
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/spi/spi-tegra114.c b/drivers/spi/spi-tegra114.c
> index 83edabdb41ad..dccd2ac1a975 100644
> --- a/drivers/spi/spi-tegra114.c
> +++ b/drivers/spi/spi-tegra114.c
> @@ -974,6 +974,7 @@ static int tegra_spi_setup(struct spi_device *spi)
>  		dev_err(tspi->dev, "pm runtime failed, e = %d\n", ret);
>  		if (cdata)
>  			tegra_spi_cleanup(spi);
> +		pm_runtime_put(tspi->dev);
>  		return ret;
>  	}
>  
> @@ -1398,6 +1399,7 @@ static int tegra_spi_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(&pdev->dev);
>  	if (ret < 0) {
>  		dev_err(&pdev->dev, "pm runtime get failed, e = %d\n", ret);
> +		pm_runtime_put(&pdev->dev);
>  		goto exit_pm_disable;
>  	}

I am wondering if it is better we use put_sync() here to ensure that
this happens before we exit the probe.

Jon

-- 
nvpublic