[PATCH v2 1/6] misc: sram: fix error path in sram_probe

Heiko Stübner heiko at sntech.de
Thu Jul 4 10:34:10 EDT 2013


Hi Philipp,

Am Dienstag, 25. Juni 2013, 11:04:34 schrieb Philipp Zabel:
> Hi Heiko,
> 
> Am Dienstag, den 25.06.2013, 10:46 +0200 schrieb Heiko Stübner:
> > The pool is created thru devm_gen_pool_create, so the call to
> > gen_pool_destroy is not necessary.
> > Instead the sram-clock must be turned off again if it exists.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko at sntech.de>
> > ---
> > 
> >  drivers/misc/sram.c |    3 ++-
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/misc/sram.c b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> > index d87cc91..afe66571 100644
> > --- a/drivers/misc/sram.c
> > +++ b/drivers/misc/sram.c
> > @@ -68,7 +68,8 @@ static int sram_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > 
> >  	ret = gen_pool_add_virt(sram->pool, (unsigned long)virt_base,
> >  	
> >  				res->start, size, -1);
> >  	
> >  	if (ret < 0) {
> > 
> > -		gen_pool_destroy(sram->pool);
> 
> Right, thanks.
> 
> > +		if (sram->clk)
> > +			clk_disable_unprepare(sram->clk);
> > 
> >  		return ret;
> >  	
> >  	}
> 
> In light of the following patch, I'd rather move the
> clk_prepare_enable() call after gen_pool_add_virt() and its error path.

I'm not sure, but isn't moving the clock enablement below the pool allocation 
producing a race condition?

I.e. can the case happen that some other part wants to allocate part of the 
newly generated pool already, while the subsequent gen_pool_add_virt calls 
from the following patch are still running? ... And what will happen in this 
case, when the sram clock is still disabled?


Thanks
Heiko



More information about the linux-arm-kernel mailing list