From: Lee Jones <lee@kernel.org>
To: Hongyan Xu <getshell@seu.edu.cn>
Cc: Support Opensource <support.opensource@diasemi.com>,
mfd@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] mfd: da903x: cancel IRQ work during teardown
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 12:53:18 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260812115318.GM1072730@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260806152032.894-1-getshell@seu.edu.cn>
On Thu, 06 Aug 2026, Hongyan Xu wrote:
> The IRQ handler disables the IRQ and schedules irq_work. Releasing the
> IRQ does not drain that work, which can continue to use the devm-allocated
> chip and notifier state.
>
> Add a devm action after requesting the IRQ. The action disables the IRQ
> and cancels the work before automatic IRQ release. Run the same action
> before removing child devices on normal detach.
>
> If da903x_add_subdevs() fails, it removes already-created child devices
> before returning from probe. Release the action explicitly before that
> cleanup so the work is stopped before child-device teardown.
>
> This issue was found by the author's in-house static analysis tool.
> The patch was reviewed by the author against the latest mainline tree.
>
> Fixes: 26b8f5e1e2d1 ("mfd: add base support for Dialog DA9030/DA9034 PMICs")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Assisted-by: Codex:GPT-5
> Signed-off-by: Hongyan Xu <getshell@seu.edu.cn>
> ---
> drivers/mfd/da903x.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git "a/drivers/mfd/da903x.c" "b/drivers/mfd/da903x.c"
> index e86b39de3303..f3e983bd21b0 100644
> --- "a/drivers/mfd/da903x.c"
> +++ "b/drivers/mfd/da903x.c"
> @@ -421,6 +421,14 @@ static irqreturn_t da903x_irq_handler(int irq, void *data)
> return IRQ_HANDLED;
> }
>
> +static void da903x_cancel_irq_work(void *data)
> +{
> + struct da903x_chip *chip = data;
> +
> + disable_irq(chip->client->irq);
> + cancel_work_sync(&chip->irq_work);
> +}
> +
> static const struct da903x_chip_ops da903x_ops[] = {
> [0] = {
> .init_chip = da9030_init_chip,
> @@ -484,6 +492,7 @@ static int da903x_add_subdevs(struct da903x_chip *chip,
> return 0;
>
> failed:
> + devm_release_action(chip->dev, da903x_cancel_irq_work, chip);
Manually calling 'devm_release_action' here and in 'da903x_remove' somewhat
defeats the purpose of using managed resources. Should we instead register
the subdevice removal as a devm action as well?
If we register the subdevices' cleanup as a devm action before the IRQ
cancel action, devres will execute them in reverse order during cleanup.
This would allow us to eliminate the '.remove' callback entirely.
> da903x_remove_subdevs(chip);
> return ret;
> }
> @@ -529,6 +538,11 @@ static int da903x_probe(struct i2c_client *client)
> return ret;
> }
>
> + ret = devm_add_action_or_reset(&client->dev, da903x_cancel_irq_work,
> + chip);
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
If we transition to using a devm action for the subdevice removal, we
could call 'da903x_add_subdevs' first, register its cleanup action, and
then register 'da903x_cancel_irq_work'. This would guarantee that the
IRQ work is cancelled before the subdevices are removed during any
unwinding or driver removal.
> return da903x_add_subdevs(chip, pdata);
> }
>
> @@ -536,6 +550,7 @@ static void da903x_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
> {
> struct da903x_chip *chip = i2c_get_clientdata(client);
>
> + devm_release_action(&client->dev, da903x_cancel_irq_work, chip);
With both cleanup steps handled by devres in the correct order, we should
be able to remove 'da903x_remove' entirely, simplifying the driver.
> da903x_remove_subdevs(chip);
> }
>
> --
> 2.50.1.windows.1
>
--
Lee Jones
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-12 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-28 6:55 [PATCH] mfd: da903x: cancel IRQ work during teardown Hongyan Xu
2026-08-06 14:16 ` Lee Jones
2026-08-06 15:20 ` [PATCH v2] " Hongyan Xu
2026-08-12 11:53 ` Lee Jones [this message]
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=20260812115318.GM1072730@google.com \
--to=lee@kernel.org \
--cc=getshell@seu.edu.cn \
--cc=jianhao.xu@seu.edu.cn \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mfd@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=support.opensource@diasemi.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