Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Sun, 14 Jun 2020 12:34:45 +0300 | Subject | Re: RFC: a failing pm_runtime_get increases the refcnt? |
| |
On Sun, Jun 14, 2020 at 12:10 PM Wolfram Sang <wsa@kernel.org> wrote: > both in the I2C subsystem and also for Renesas drivers I maintain, I am > starting to get boilerplate patches doing some pm_runtime_put_* variant > because a failing pm_runtime_get is supposed to increase the ref > counters? Really? This feels wrong and unintuitive to me.
Yeah, that is a well known issue with PM (I even have for a long time a coccinelle script, when I realized myself that there are a lot of cases like this, but someone else discovered this recently, like opening a can of worms).
> I expect there > has been a discussion around it but I couldn't find it.
Rafael explained (again) recently this. I can't find it quickly, unfortunately.
> I wonder why we > don't fix the code where the incremented refcount is expected for some > reason.
The main idea behind API that a lot of drivers do *not* check error codes from runtime PM, so, we need to keep balance in case of
pm_runtime_get(...); ... pm_runtime_put(...);
> Can I have some pointers please?
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |