Re: [PATCH v12 1/2] pwm: Add PWM driver for Intel Keem Bay
From: Uwe Kleine-König <hidden>
Date: 2020-10-19 06:46:28
Also in:
linux-pwm
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 12:21:27PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
On Fri, Oct 16, 2020 at 03:18:08AM +0000, Ayyathurai, Vijayakannan wrote:quoted
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> Sent: Thursday, 15 October, 2020 4:12 PM On Thu, Oct 15, 2020 at 03:36:09AM +0800, vijayakannan.ayyathurai@intel.com wrote:quoted
From: Vijayakannan Ayyathurai <redacted>...quoted
quoted
+ priv->clk = devm_clk_get(dev, NULL); + if (IS_ERR(priv->clk)) + return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(priv->clk), "Failed to get +clock\n"); + + ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->clk); + if (ret) + return ret; + + priv->base = devm_platform_ioremap_resource(pdev, 0); + if (IS_ERR(priv->base)) {quoted
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);See below.quoted
+ return PTR_ERR(priv->base); + } + + priv->chip.base = -1; + priv->chip.dev = dev; + priv->chip.ops = &keembay_pwm_ops; + priv->chip.npwm = KMB_TOTAL_PWM_CHANNELS; + + ret = pwmchip_add(&priv->chip); + if (ret) { + dev_err(dev, "Failed to add PWM chip: %pe\n", ERR_PTR(ret));quoted
+ clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk);This messes up with ordering of things. That's why devm golden rule is either all or none. You may fix this by switching to devm_add_action_or_reset(). One of possible way is like in below drivers: % git grep -n devm_add_action_or_reset.*disable_unprepare -- drivers/ But it may be fixed in follow up change. Depends on maintainers' wishes. Sure. I shall incorporate and check based on maintainers wish in the next version.quoted
+ return ret; + } + + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, priv); + + return 0; +} + +static int keembay_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) { + struct keembay_pwm *priv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); + int ret; + + ret = pwmchip_remove(&priv->chip); + clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk); + + return ret;...and this will be simplified to return pwmchip_remove(&priv->chip); Until v10, It is as per your suggestion. But I have changed it in v11 to overcome the issue mentioned by Uwe. I have kept the snip of v10 FYR below. //Start snip from v10 review mailing list //> +static int keembay_pwm_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) { //> + struct keembay_pwm *priv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); //> + //> + clk_disable_unprepare(priv->clk); //> + //> + return pwmchip_remove(&priv->chip); // //You have to call pwmchip_remove first. Otherwise you're stopping the PWM while the framework still believes everything to be fine. // //> +} //End snip from v10 review mailing reviewquoted
+}What I said does not contradict with what Uwe said. So, please, fix ordering either by dropping devm_ in the middle or adding devm_ action. Now you moved serious ordering issue in ->remove() (which Uwe noted) to less serious in ->probe(). But issue is still present.
The easiest way is probably to do the clk_prepare_enable() only after all devm_ stuff in .probe. (But I'm not emphatic about that, it would be fine for me to wait until devm_clk_get_enabled() lands.) Best regards Uwe -- Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König | Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Attachments
- signature.asc [application/pgp-signature] 488 bytes