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=-10.0 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS 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 E5845C433E1 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 22:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C50C520768 for ; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 22:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727075AbgGQWzq (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:55:46 -0400 Received: from relay4-d.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.183.196]:33509 "EHLO relay4-d.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726204AbgGQWzp (ORCPT ); Fri, 17 Jul 2020 18:55:45 -0400 X-Originating-IP: 90.65.108.121 Received: from localhost (lfbn-lyo-1-1676-121.w90-65.abo.wanadoo.fr [90.65.108.121]) (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay4-d.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6DEB7E0004; Fri, 17 Jul 2020 22:55:43 +0000 (UTC) Date: Sat, 18 Jul 2020 00:55:42 +0200 From: Alexandre Belloni To: "yukuai (C)" Cc: linux@armlinux.org.uk, nicolas.ferre@microchip.com, ludovic.desroches@microchip.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, yi.zhang@huawei.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] ARM: at91: pm: add missing put_device() call in at91_pm_sram_init() Message-ID: <20200717225542.GZ3428@piout.net> References: <20200604123301.3905837-1-yukuai3@huawei.com> <20200702200915.GC6538@piout.net> <01fd6279-524e-3cee-4c16-5b748a49d0f0@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01fd6279-524e-3cee-4c16-5b748a49d0f0@huawei.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 03/07/2020 09:15:20+0800, yukuai (C) wrote: > > On 2020/7/3 4:09, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 04/06/2020 20:33:01+0800, yu kuai wrote: > > > if of_find_device_by_node() succeed, at91_pm_sram_init() doesn't have > > > a corresponding put_device(). Thus add a jump target to fix the exception > > > handling for this function implementation. > > > > > > Fixes: d2e467905596 ("ARM: at91: pm: use the mmio-sram pool to access SRAM") > > > Signed-off-by: yu kuai > > > --- > > > arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c | 11 ++++++++--- > > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c > > > index 074bde64064e..2aab043441e8 100644 > > > --- a/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c > > > +++ b/arch/arm/mach-at91/pm.c > > > @@ -592,13 +592,13 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void) > > > sram_pool = gen_pool_get(&pdev->dev, NULL); > > > > Isn't the best solution to simply have put_device hereHi, Alexandre ! > > I think put_device() is supposed to be called in the exception handling > path. > > > > > > if (!sram_pool) { > > > pr_warn("%s: sram pool unavailable!\n", __func__); > > > - return; > > > + goto out_put_device; > > > } > > > sram_base = gen_pool_alloc(sram_pool, at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz); > > > if (!sram_base) { > > > pr_warn("%s: unable to alloc sram!\n", __func__); > > > - return; > > > + goto out_put_device; > > > } > > > sram_pbase = gen_pool_virt_to_phys(sram_pool, sram_base); > > > @@ -606,12 +606,17 @@ static void __init at91_pm_sram_init(void) > > > at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz, false); > > > if (!at91_suspend_sram_fn) { > > > pr_warn("SRAM: Could not map\n"); > > > - return; > > > + goto out_put_device; > > > } > > > /* Copy the pm suspend handler to SRAM */ > > > at91_suspend_sram_fn = fncpy(at91_suspend_sram_fn, > > > &at91_pm_suspend_in_sram, at91_pm_suspend_in_sram_sz); > > If nothing is wrong, maybe put_device shounld't be called? > I don't think this is the case but as the reference implementation (imx6) is carrying the patch, I'm going to apply this one. A better fix would have been to also factorize imx_suspend_alloc_ocram, imx6q_suspend_init, socfpga_setup_ocram_self_refresh and at91_pm_sram_init as they were all copied from pm-imx6.c -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com