Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 May 2023 14:07:10 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] PCI: dwc: keystone: Free IRQ in `ks_pcie_remove` and the error handling section of `ks_pcie_probe` | From | 曾祥翼 <> |
| |
On 17/5/2023 03:49, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 01:16:59PM +0800, Xiangyi Zeng wrote: >> Smatch complains that: >> drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pci-keystone.c:1303 ks_pcie_probe() warn: >> 'irq' from request_irq() not released on lines: 1183,1187,1303. > Make this the entire warning line from smatch with no extra newlines > inserted. Thank you for the suggestion. I will put the warning in one line. >> "ks-pcie-error-irq" was requested in the `ks_pcie_probe` function, but >> was not freed neither in the error handling part of `ks_pcie_probe` >> nor in the `ks_pcie_remove` function. >> >> Fix this by adding `free_irq` in `ks_pcie_remove` and in a new error >> handling label `err_alloc` after `err_link` in `ks_pcie_probe`. In >> `ks_pcie_probe`, if `phy` or `link` memory allocation fails, we will >> fall to `err_alloc`. If any other error occurs that leads to >> `err_get_sync` or `err_link`, we end up going to `err_alloc`. > I think the backticks (`) are markdown that makes these "code". > Personally I think ks_pcie_probe() is more readable than > `ks_pcie_probe` since most people (I think) read these in plain-ASCII > situations. And using backticks for labels and local variables seems > like overkill. > Sorry for my wrong usage of backticks. I agree that it would be more readable to use plain-ASCII names for functions and variables. I will make sure to update the comment message and the subject. >> Fixes: 0790eb175ee0 ("PCI: keystone: Cleanup error_irq configuration") >> Signed-off-by: Xiangyi Zeng <xyzeng@stu.xidian.edu.cn> >> Reviewed-by: Dongliang Mu <dzm91@hust.edu.cn> > It's best if the Reviewed-by tag is not added until Dongliang sends > email with that tag directly to the mailing list. Internal reviews > before posting to the mailing list aren't worth much. In our internal review process, only the patch with the Reviewed-by tag can be submitted to the mailing list. You can check this in our google group. https://groups.google.com/g/hust-os-kernel-patches/c/bt397rzVL24/m/l52XYbG4AgAJ We will consider omitting this tag when sending to the kernel mailing list in the future. >> @@ -1309,12 +1316,14 @@ static int __exit ks_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> struct device_link **link = ks_pcie->link; >> int num_lanes = ks_pcie->num_lanes; >> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; >> + int irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0); > I think it's better to save the irq we looked up in ks_pcie_probe() > and free *that*. It's probably the same thing you get by calling > platform_get_irq() again, but it seems cleaner to me to save what we > got in ks_pcie_probe(). Thanks for your guidance. I agree with saving the irq to make code cleaner. I will change it in the next version. >> pm_runtime_put(dev); >> pm_runtime_disable(dev); >> ks_pcie_disable_phy(ks_pcie); >> while (num_lanes--) >> device_link_del(link[num_lanes]); >> + free_irq(irq, ks_pcie); >> >> return 0; >> } >> -- >> 2.34.1 >>
| |