Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Thu, 19 Jan 2023 13:11:21 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/5] thermal/core: Remove unneeded mutex_destroy() |
| |
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:30 AM Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org> wrote: > > On 19/01/2023 08:41, Zhang, Rui wrote: > > On Wed, 2023-01-18 at 22:11 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote: > >> If the thermal framework fails to initialize, the mutex can be used > >> by > >> the different functions registering a thermal zone anyway. > > > > Hmm, even with no governors and unregistered thermal sysfs class? > > > > IMO, thermal APIs for registering a thermal_zone/cooling_device should > > yield early if thermal_init fails. > > For other APIs that relies on a valid > > thermal_zone_device/thermal_cooling_device pointer, nothing needs to > > be changed. > > > > what do you think? > > I think you are right. > > It would be nice if we can check if the thermal class is registered and > bail out if not. But there is no function to check that AFAICS. > > Alternatively we can convert the thermal class static structure to a > pointer and set it to NULL in case of error in thermal_init() ?
It doesn't matter if this is a NULL pointer or a static object that's clearly marked as unused.
| |