lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Oct]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Input: synaptics-rmi4 - Fix error handling in I2C transport driver
    From
    Date
    On 10/01/2016 12:04 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
    > On Sat, Oct 01, 2016 at 10:27:42AM -0700, Andrew Duggan wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016, at 08:44 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:
    >>> On 09/30/2016 04:02 PM, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
    >>>> On Fri, Sep 30, 2016 at 03:54:03PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
    >>>>> On Thu, Sep 29, 2016 at 10:55:40AM -0700, Bjorn Andersson wrote:
    >>>>>> On Wed 28 Sep 17:37 PDT 2016, Guenter Roeck wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Instantiating the rmi4 I2C transport driver without interrupts assigned
    >>>>>>> (for example using manual i2c instantiation from the command line)
    >>>>>>> caused the driver to fail to load, but it does not clean up its
    >>>>>>> regulator or transport device registrations. Result is a crash at a later
    >>>>>>> time, for example when rebooting the system.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Fixes: 946c8432aab0 ("Input: synaptics-rmi4 - support regulator supplies")
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Sorry for that.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Fixes: fdf51604f104 ("Input: synaptics-rmi4 - add I2C transport driver")
    >>>>>>> Cc: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Reviewed-by: Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@linaro.org>
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Applied, thank you.
    >>>>
    >>>> I take it back. rmi_i2c_init_irq() uses devm* so this whole thing mixes
    >>>> up devm* and manual unregistering and unwind order is completely
    >>>> broken.
    >>>>
    >>> Oops ...
    >>>
    >>>> 1. Why do we register interrupt from transport drivers and not make it
    >>>> part of rmi_register_transport_device()?
    >>
    >> Not all RMI devices will have access to interrupts (ie HID and SMBus).
    >> The same goes for regulators. Here is a reference to a previous
    >> discussion regarding both:
    >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/5/9/1055
    >
    > Yeah, I am wondering if we should not revisit this and have SMBus (and
    > possibly HID) actually provide us with an interrupt.
    >
    > In the meantime we can just ignore interrupt value if it is set to 0.
    >

    I have another follow-up patch doing that (I have a test setup which
    doesn't support interrupts); I just wasn't sure if there was interest,
    so I did not yet send it out. I'll be happy to do that, though I would
    prefer to keep it separate (it isn't a bug fix, after all).

    Thanks,
    Guenter

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2016-10-01 22:47    [W:5.020 / U:0.676 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site