[PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[Philipp Puschmann]

If probe fails after enabling the regulators regulator_put is called for
each supply without having them disabled before. This produces some
warnings like

WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 90 at drivers/regulator/core.c:2044 _regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c
[<c010f7a8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c544>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
[<c010c544>] (show_stack) from [<c012b640>] (__warn+0xd0/0xf4)
[<c012b640>] (__warn) from [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x64/0xc4)
[<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c)
[<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0) from [<c04c4094>] (regulator_put+0x28/0x38)
[<c04c4094>] (regulator_put) from [<c04c40cc>] (regulator_bulk_free+0x28/0x38)
[<c04c40cc>] (regulator_bulk_free) from [<c0579b2c>] (release_nodes+0x1d0/0x22c)
[<c0579b2c>] (release_nodes) from [<c05756dc>] (really_probe+0x108/0x34c)
[<c05756dc>] (really_probe) from [<c0575aec>] (driver_probe_device+0xb8/0x16c)
[<c0575aec>] (driver_probe_device) from [<c0575d40>] (device_driver_attach+0x58/0x60)
[<c0575d40>] (device_driver_attach) from [<c0575da0>] (__driver_attach+0x58/0xcc)
[<c0575da0>] (__driver_attach) from [<c0573978>] (bus_for_each_dev+0x78/0xc0)
[<c0573978>] (bus_for_each_dev) from [<c0574b5c>] (bus_add_driver+0x188/0x1e0)
[<c0574b5c>] (bus_add_driver) from [<c05768b0>] (driver_register+0x74/0x108)
[<c05768b0>] (driver_register) from [<c061ab7c>] (i2c_register_driver+0x3c/0x88)
[<c061ab7c>] (i2c_register_driver) from [<c0102df8>] (do_one_initcall+0x58/0x250)
[<c0102df8>] (do_one_initcall) from [<c01a91bc>] (do_init_module+0x60/0x244)
[<c01a91bc>] (do_init_module) from [<c01ab5a4>] (load_module+0x2180/0x2540)
[<c01ab5a4>] (load_module) from [<c01abbd4>] (sys_finit_module+0xd0/0xe8)
[<c01abbd4>] (sys_finit_module) from [<c01011e0>] (__sys_trace_return+0x0/0x20)

Fixes: 3fd6e7d9a146 (ASoC: tas571x: New driver for TI TAS571x power amplifiers)
Signed-off-by: Philipp Puschmann <p.puschmann@pironex.de>
---
 sound/soc/codecs/tas571x.c | 20 +++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/codecs/tas571x.c b/sound/soc/codecs/tas571x.c
index 1554631cb397..5b7f9fcf6cbf 100644
--- a/sound/soc/codecs/tas571x.c
+++ b/sound/soc/codecs/tas571x.c
@@ -820,8 +820,10 @@ static int tas571x_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 
 	priv->regmap = devm_regmap_init(dev, NULL, client,
 					priv->chip->regmap_config);
-	if (IS_ERR(priv->regmap))
-		return PTR_ERR(priv->regmap);
+	if (IS_ERR(priv->regmap)) {
+		ret = PTR_ERR(priv->regmap);
+		goto disable_regs;
+	}
 
 	priv->pdn_gpio = devm_gpiod_get_optional(dev, "pdn", GPIOD_OUT_LOW);
 	if (IS_ERR(priv->pdn_gpio)) {
@@ -845,7 +847,7 @@ static int tas571x_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 
 	ret = regmap_write(priv->regmap, TAS571X_OSC_TRIM_REG, 0);
 	if (ret)
-		return ret;
+		goto disable_regs;
 
 	usleep_range(50000, 60000);
 
@@ -861,12 +863,20 @@ static int tas571x_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client,
 		 */
 		ret = regmap_update_bits(priv->regmap, TAS571X_MVOL_REG, 1, 0);
 		if (ret)
-			return ret;
+			goto disable_regs;
 	}
 
-	return devm_snd_soc_register_component(&client->dev,
+	ret = devm_snd_soc_register_component(&client->dev,
 				      &priv->component_driver,
 				      &tas571x_dai, 1);
+	if (ret)
+		goto disable_regs;
+
+	return ret;
+
+disable_regs:
+	regulator_bulk_disable(priv->chip->num_supply_names, priv->supplies);
+	return ret;
 }
 
 static int tas571x_i2c_remove(struct i2c_client *client)
-- 
2.26.0

Re: [PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1017 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:27:54PM +0200, Philipp Puschmann wrote:
> If probe fails after enabling the regulators regulator_put is called for
> each supply without having them disabled before. This produces some
> warnings like
> 
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 90 at drivers/regulator/core.c:2044 _regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c
> [<c010f7a8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c544>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> [<c010c544>] (show_stack) from [<c012b640>] (__warn+0xd0/0xf4)
> [<c012b640>] (__warn) from [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x64/0xc4)
> [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c)

Please think hard before including complete backtraces in upstream
reports, they are very large and contain almost no useful information
relative to their size so often obscure the relevant content in your
message. If part of the backtrace is usefully illustrative (it often is
for search engines if nothing else) then it's usually better to pull out
the relevant sections.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[Mark Brown]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1017 bytes --]

On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 01:27:54PM +0200, Philipp Puschmann wrote:
> If probe fails after enabling the regulators regulator_put is called for
> each supply without having them disabled before. This produces some
> warnings like
> 
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 90 at drivers/regulator/core.c:2044 _regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c
> [<c010f7a8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c544>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
> [<c010c544>] (show_stack) from [<c012b640>] (__warn+0xd0/0xf4)
> [<c012b640>] (__warn) from [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x64/0xc4)
> [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c)

Please think hard before including complete backtraces in upstream
reports, they are very large and contain almost no useful information
relative to their size so often obscure the relevant content in your
message. If part of the backtrace is usefully illustrative (it often is
for search engines if nothing else) then it's usually better to pull out
the relevant sections.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

Re: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[Philipp Puschmann]

>> If probe fails after enabling the regulators regulator_put is called for
>> each supply without having them disabled before. This produces some
>> warnings like
>>=20
>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 90 at drivers/regulator/core.c:2044 _regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c
>> [<c010f7a8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c544>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>> [<c010c544>] (show_stack) from [<c012b640>] (__warn+0xd0/0xf4)
>> [<c012b640>] (__warn) from [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x64/0xc4)
>> [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c)
>
>Please think hard before including complete backtraces in upstream
>reports, they are very large and contain almost no useful information
>relative to their size so often obscure the relevant content in your
>message. If part of the backtrace is usefully illustrative (it often is
>for search engines if nothing else) then it's usually better to pull out
>the relevant sections.

You are right. I will take care next time.

Regards,
Philipp

Re: Re: [PATCH] ASoC: tas571x: disable regulators on failed probe

[Philipp Puschmann]

>> If probe fails after enabling the regulators regulator_put is called for
>> each supply without having them disabled before. This produces some
>> warnings like
>>=20
>> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 90 at drivers/regulator/core.c:2044 _regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c
>> [<c010f7a8>] (unwind_backtrace) from [<c010c544>] (show_stack+0x10/0x14)
>> [<c010c544>] (show_stack) from [<c012b640>] (__warn+0xd0/0xf4)
>> [<c012b640>] (__warn) from [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt+0x64/0xc4)
>> [<c012b9b4>] (warn_slowpath_fmt) from [<c04c4064>] (_regulator_put.part.0+0x154/0x15c)
>
>Please think hard before including complete backtraces in upstream
>reports, they are very large and contain almost no useful information
>relative to their size so often obscure the relevant content in your
>message. If part of the backtrace is usefully illustrative (it often is
>for search engines if nothing else) then it's usually better to pull out
>the relevant sections.

You are right. I will take care next time.

Regards,
Philipp