[PATCH] mfd: fsl-imx25: Fix an error handling path in mx25_tsadc_setup_irq()

[PATCH] mfd: fsl-imx25: Fix an error handling path in mx25_tsadc_setup_irq()

[Christophe JAILLET]

If devm_of_platform_populate() fails, some resources need to be
released.

Introduce a mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() function that undoes
mx25_tsadc_setup_irq() and call it both from the new error handling path
of the probe and in the remove function.

Fixes: a55196eff6d6 ("mfd: fsl-imx25: Use devm_of_platform_populate()")
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
---
mx25_tsadc_setup_irq() and mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() are not symetrical.
One tests for "(irq <= 0)" while the other one tests for "(irq)".

If <0 the probe will fails, so that is fine.
If ==0, according to doc platform_get_irq() can't return 0, so that should
be fine as well.


That said, I think that the "if (irq)" in mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() can be
removed.
---
 drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c b/drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c
index 37e5e02a1d05..85f7982d26d2 100644
--- a/drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c
+++ b/drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c
@@ -84,6 +84,19 @@ static int mx25_tsadc_setup_irq(struct platform_device *pdev,
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static int mx25_tsadc_unset_irq(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
+	struct mx25_tsadc *tsadc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
+	int irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
+
+	if (irq) {
+		irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(irq, NULL, NULL);
+		irq_domain_remove(tsadc->domain);
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static void mx25_tsadc_setup_clk(struct platform_device *pdev,
 				 struct mx25_tsadc *tsadc)
 {
@@ -171,18 +184,21 @@ static int mx25_tsadc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
 
 	platform_set_drvdata(pdev, tsadc);
 
-	return devm_of_platform_populate(dev);
+	ret = devm_of_platform_populate(dev);
+	if (ret)
+		goto err_irq;
+
+	return 0;
+
+err_irq:
+	mx25_tsadc_unset_irq(pdev);
+
+	return ret;
 }
 
 static int mx25_tsadc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
 {
-	struct mx25_tsadc *tsadc = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
-	int irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
-
-	if (irq) {
-		irq_set_chained_handler_and_data(irq, NULL, NULL);
-		irq_domain_remove(tsadc->domain);
-	}
+	mx25_tsadc_unset_irq(pdev);
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.34.1


_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

Re: [PATCH] mfd: fsl-imx25: Fix an error handling path in mx25_tsadc_setup_irq()

[Lee Jones]

On Sun, 31 Jul 2022, Christophe JAILLET wrote:

> If devm_of_platform_populate() fails, some resources need to be
> released.
> 
> Introduce a mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() function that undoes
> mx25_tsadc_setup_irq() and call it both from the new error handling path
> of the probe and in the remove function.
> 
> Fixes: a55196eff6d6 ("mfd: fsl-imx25: Use devm_of_platform_populate()")
> Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
> ---
> mx25_tsadc_setup_irq() and mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() are not symetrical.
> One tests for "(irq <= 0)" while the other one tests for "(irq)".
> 
> If <0 the probe will fails, so that is fine.
> If ==0, according to doc platform_get_irq() can't return 0, so that should
> be fine as well.
> 
> 
> That said, I think that the "if (irq)" in mx25_tsadc_unset_irq() can be
> removed.
> ---
>  drivers/mfd/fsl-imx25-tsadc.c | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

Applied, thanks.

-- 
Lee Jones [李琼斯]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel