linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure
@ 2020-06-05  3:00 Navid Emamdoost
  2020-06-05 10:56 ` Charles Keepax
  2020-06-10  9:20 ` Linus Walleij
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Navid Emamdoost @ 2020-06-05  3:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Linus Walleij, Bartosz Golaszewski, patches, linux-gpio, linux-kernel
  Cc: emamd001, wu000273, kjlu, smccaman, Navid Emamdoost

Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
failure, causing incorrect ref count if pm_runtime_put is not called in
error handling paths. Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.

Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@gmail.com>
---
 drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c
index 7520a13b4c7c..5bda38e0780f 100644
--- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c
+++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c
@@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ static int arizona_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
 		ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->parent);
 		if (ret < 0) {
 			dev_err(chip->parent, "Failed to resume: %d\n", ret);
+			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
 			return ret;
 		}
 
@@ -72,12 +73,15 @@ static int arizona_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
 		if (ret < 0) {
 			dev_err(chip->parent, "Failed to drop cache: %d\n",
 				ret);
+			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
 			return ret;
 		}
 
 		ret = regmap_read(arizona->regmap, reg, &val);
-		if (ret < 0)
+		if (ret < 0) {
+			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
 			return ret;
+		}
 
 		pm_runtime_mark_last_busy(chip->parent);
 		pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
-- 
2.17.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure
  2020-06-05  3:00 [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure Navid Emamdoost
@ 2020-06-05 10:56 ` Charles Keepax
  2020-06-10  9:20 ` Linus Walleij
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Charles Keepax @ 2020-06-05 10:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Navid Emamdoost
  Cc: Linus Walleij, Bartosz Golaszewski, patches, linux-gpio,
	linux-kernel, emamd001, wu000273, kjlu, smccaman

On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 10:00:52PM -0500, Navid Emamdoost wrote:
> Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
> failure, causing incorrect ref count if pm_runtime_put is not called in
> error handling paths. Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@gmail.com>
> ---

Acked-by: Charles Keepax <ckeepax@opensource.cirrus.com>

Thanks,
Charles

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure
  2020-06-05  3:00 [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure Navid Emamdoost
  2020-06-05 10:56 ` Charles Keepax
@ 2020-06-10  9:20 ` Linus Walleij
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Linus Walleij @ 2020-06-10  9:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Navid Emamdoost
  Cc: Bartosz Golaszewski, patches, open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM,
	linux-kernel, Navid Emamdoost, wu000273, Kangjie Lu, smccaman

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 5:01 AM Navid Emamdoost
<navid.emamdoost@gmail.com> wrote:

> Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
> failure, causing incorrect ref count if pm_runtime_put is not called in
> error handling paths. Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.
>
> Signed-off-by: Navid Emamdoost <navid.emamdoost@gmail.com>

Patch applied for fixes.

Yours,
Linus Walleij

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure
  2020-06-05 12:14 Markus Elfring
@ 2020-06-10 14:54 ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Greg KH @ 2020-06-10 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Markus Elfring
  Cc: Navid Emamdoost, linux-gpio, patches, Navid Emamdoost,
	Kangjie Lu, Stephen McCamant, Qiushi Wu, Bartosz Golaszewski,
	Charles Keepax, Linus Walleij, kernel-janitors, LKML

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 02:14:38PM +0200, Markus Elfring wrote:
> I recommend to replace the word “pm_runtime” by the
> alternative “PM run time system” in the patch subject.
> 
> 
> > Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
> > failure, causing incorrect ref count if pm_runtime_put is not called in
> > error handling paths.
> 
> Should the term “reference count” be used here?
> 
> 
> > Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.
> 
> The diff hunks show an other function name.
> 
> 
> …
> > +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c
> > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@  static int arizona_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
> >  		ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->parent);
> >  		if (ret < 0) {
> >  			dev_err(chip->parent, "Failed to resume: %d\n", ret);
> > +			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
> >  			return ret;
> >  		}
> 
> You propose to use identical statements in three if branches.
> Please add a corresponding jump target for better exception handling.
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id=435faf5c218a47fd6258187f62d9bb1009717896#n455
> 
> 
> Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message?
> 
> 
> I find it amazing how many questionable implementation details
> you pointed out recently.
> Were these contributions triggered by an evolving source code analysis
> tool like CheQ?
> https://github.com/umnsec/cheq/
> 
> Regards,
> Markus

Hi,

This is the semi-friendly patch-bot of Greg Kroah-Hartman.

Markus, you seem to have sent a nonsensical or otherwise pointless
review comment to a patch submission on a Linux kernel developer mailing
list.  I strongly suggest that you not do this anymore.  Please do not
bother developers who are actively working to produce patches and
features with comments that, in the end, are a waste of time.

Patch submitter, please ignore Markus's suggestion; you do not need to
follow it at all.  The person/bot/AI that sent it is being ignored by
almost all Linux kernel maintainers for having a persistent pattern of
behavior of producing distracting and pointless commentary, and
inability to adapt to feedback.  Please feel free to also ignore emails
from them.

thanks,

greg k-h's patch email bot

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure
@ 2020-06-05 12:14 Markus Elfring
  2020-06-10 14:54 ` Greg KH
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Markus Elfring @ 2020-06-05 12:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Navid Emamdoost, linux-gpio, patches
  Cc: Navid Emamdoost, Kangjie Lu, Stephen McCamant, Qiushi Wu,
	Bartosz Golaszewski, Charles Keepax, Linus Walleij,
	kernel-janitors, LKML

I recommend to replace the word “pm_runtime” by the
alternative “PM run time system” in the patch subject.


> Calling pm_runtime_get_sync increments the counter even in case of
> failure, causing incorrect ref count if pm_runtime_put is not called in
> error handling paths.

Should the term “reference count” be used here?


> Call pm_runtime_put if pm_runtime_get_sync fails.

The diff hunks show an other function name.


…
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-arizona.c
> @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@  static int arizona_gpio_get(struct gpio_chip *chip, unsigned offset)
>  		ret = pm_runtime_get_sync(chip->parent);
>  		if (ret < 0) {
>  			dev_err(chip->parent, "Failed to resume: %d\n", ret);
> +			pm_runtime_put_autosuspend(chip->parent);
>  			return ret;
>  		}

You propose to use identical statements in three if branches.
Please add a corresponding jump target for better exception handling.
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/coding-style.rst?id=435faf5c218a47fd6258187f62d9bb1009717896#n455


Would you like to add the tag “Fixes” to the commit message?


I find it amazing how many questionable implementation details
you pointed out recently.
Were these contributions triggered by an evolving source code analysis
tool like CheQ?
https://github.com/umnsec/cheq/

Regards,
Markus

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2020-06-10 14:54 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2020-06-05  3:00 [PATCH] gpio: arizona: put pm_runtime in case of failure Navid Emamdoost
2020-06-05 10:56 ` Charles Keepax
2020-06-10  9:20 ` Linus Walleij
2020-06-05 12:14 Markus Elfring
2020-06-10 14:54 ` Greg KH

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).