From: William Theesfeld <william@theesfeld.net>
To: Xingyu Wu <xingyu.wu@starfivetech.com>
Cc: Ziv Xu <ziv.xu@starfivetech.com>,
Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@linux-watchdog.org>,
Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v3 0/6] watchdog: starfive: runtime PM cleanup
Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 13:19:36 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <cover.1780666366.git.william@theesfeld.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1780664848.git.william@theesfeld.net>
This series addresses runtime PM correctness issues in the StarFive
watchdog driver. v3 fixes three issues that were raised against v2:
Changes in v3:
- 2/6 (pm_runtime_put_sync positive return): the v2 commit message
and code comment described the semantics of a "1" return as "the
device is still in use", which is wrong — that case is signalled
by -EAGAIN. A positive return indicates a non-error condition such
as the device already being in the requested state. Reword both
the commit message and the in-function comment to describe this
correctly. No code change beyond that.
- 3/6 (probe error path restructure): the v2 patch left a path that
put the runtime PM usage counter twice. When the success-path
pm_runtime_put_sync() (line ~513) returns an error, the function
jumps to err_unregister_wdt. In v2 that label fell through to
err_put_pm, which called pm_runtime_put_sync() a second time on a
counter that had already been decremented by the first put.
Insert an explicit "goto err_pm_disable;" after the unregister so
the post-register error path skips the second put.
- 4/6 (system suspend/resume guard): the v2 patch added a
pm_runtime_status_suspended() check on the resume path but kept
the final restart predicate as watchdog_active(). For watchdogs
started via early_enable, the framework state is WDOG_HW_RUNNING
without WDOG_ACTIVE, so the existing predicate left the hardware
permanently stopped after a system suspend/resume cycle (the
matching suspend path had already stopped it). Extend the
predicate to also accept watchdog_hw_running().
Patches 1, 5, and 6 are unchanged from v2.
Several pre-existing issues in adjacent code paths were flagged
during v2 review (hardware access during driver unbind, possible
races between device_shutdown() and the watchdog reboot notifier,
SETTIMEOUT/GETTIMELEFT ioctls touching gated registers). They are
not addressed in this series; each is a separate logical change
that deserves its own patch and its own justification. Happy to
follow up on any the maintainers want addressed first.
The whole series builds cleanly with CONFIG_STARFIVE_WATCHDOG=m on
x86_64 defconfig. Runtime testing would require StarFive JH7100 /
JH7110 hardware and has not been performed.
William Theesfeld (6):
watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount when start operation fails
watchdog: starfive: treat pm_runtime_put_sync() positive return as
success
watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount and disable in probe error
paths
watchdog: starfive: guard system suspend/resume hardware access
watchdog: starfive: avoid PM refcount underflow in shutdown
watchdog: starfive: release early_enable PM refcount on remove
drivers/watchdog/starfive-wdt.c | 109 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 89 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
--
2.54.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-05 17:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-05 12:23 [PATCH] watchdog: starfive: use pm_runtime_resume_and_get() to fix refcount leak William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 12:35 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 0/6] watchdog: starfive: runtime PM cleanup William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 1/6] watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount when start operation fails William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 2/6] watchdog: starfive: treat pm_runtime_put_sync() positive return as success William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 3/6] watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount and disable in probe error paths William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:24 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 4/6] watchdog: starfive: guard system suspend/resume hardware access William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:27 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 5/6] watchdog: starfive: avoid PM refcount underflow in shutdown William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:29 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 13:11 ` [PATCH v2 6/6] watchdog: starfive: release early_enable PM refcount on remove William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 13:33 ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-05 17:19 ` William Theesfeld [this message]
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount when start operation fails William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] watchdog: starfive: treat pm_runtime_put_sync() positive return as success William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] watchdog: starfive: balance PM refcount and disable in probe error paths William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] watchdog: starfive: guard system suspend/resume hardware access William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] watchdog: starfive: avoid PM refcount underflow in shutdown William Theesfeld
2026-06-05 17:19 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] watchdog: starfive: release early_enable PM refcount on remove William Theesfeld
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=cover.1780666366.git.william@theesfeld.net \
--to=william@theesfeld.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux@roeck-us.net \
--cc=wim@linux-watchdog.org \
--cc=xingyu.wu@starfivetech.com \
--cc=ziv.xu@starfivetech.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox