On Thursday, December 7, 2017 9:29:58 AM CET Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Thu, Dec 07, 2017 at 12:19:25AM +0100, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Hi Greg, > > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> On 12/6/2017 11:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >>>> On 12/6/2017 9:57 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: > > >>>>>> Yes, it should, so I'm not sure why you need the list in the first place. > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Also it looks like something along the lines of devres_release_all() > > >>>>>> should be sufficient. > > >>>>> Good suggestion, let me test this. > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> I tried to pull the code into GED but the API is not public. I also looked > > >>>> at how it is used. I was afraid to mess up with the internals of base.c by > > >>>> calling devres_release_all() externally first and by the driver framework > > >>>> next. I moved away from this approach. > > >>> > > >>> Are you sure it is called by the core in the shutdown path? > > >> > > >> Sorry, I was thinking about a general case not the shutdown path. If we open > > >> this API and have device drivers call it from arbitrary places; then we could > > >> be opening a new can of worms that show up during device driver removal. > > > > [cut] > > > > > > > > OK > > > > > > Anyway, it looks like something is missing in the core. > > > > > > You shouldn't really need to do all that dance in a driver. > > > > We have a problem with the ACPI GED driver which essentially is a > > platform driver requesting a number of interrupts and handling them by > > dispatching a specific AML method. > > > > It uses devm_request_threaded_irq() to request the interrupts, so it > > doesn't need a ->remove() callback, but it turns out to need a > > ->shutdown() one to free all of these interrupts at the shutdown time. > > > > While we can add a ->shutdown() callback to it, that essentially needs > > to duplicate devres_release_all() somewhat. > > > > Any suggestions what to do with that? > > Just don't use devm_request_threaded_irq()? :) > > Seriously, those are just "helper" functions if your code happens to > follow the pattern they provide, if not, then don't use them, it's not > that hard to provide the correct code to unwind things properly by "open > coding" this logic as needed. > > The devm_*irq() functions are known for not being able to be used all of > the time for lots of shutdown and cleanup issues, this isn't the first > time it has happened, which is why we are very careful when taking > "cleanup" patches that use those functions. I see, thanks for the clarification. OK, we'll need to rework the driver somewhat, then. Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
