On 11/10/23 20:11, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
Make i2c_dw_pci_remove() to be aligned with dw_i2c_plat_remove() on
the sequence of the ceasing I²C operations.
Fixes: 18dbdda89f5c ("i2c-designware: Add runtime power management support")
I think this is wrong. Commit 18dbdda89f5c is 12 years ago so is this
patch really fixing a real bug that was hiding all these years?
Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c | 4 +++-
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c
index 61d7a27aa070..35d35d7c8e23 100644
--- a/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c
+++ b/drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-designware-pcidrv.c
@@ -354,11 +354,13 @@ static void i2c_dw_pci_remove(struct pci_dev *pdev)
{
struct dw_i2c_dev *dev = pci_get_drvdata(pdev);
+ i2c_del_adapter(&dev->adapter);
+
dev->disable(dev);
+
pm_runtime_forbid(&pdev->dev);
pm_runtime_get_noresume(&pdev->dev);
- i2c_del_adapter(&dev->adapter);
devm_free_irq(&pdev->dev, dev->irq, dev);
pci_free_irq_vectors(pdev);
}
Then I believe this patch may potentially introduce a bug. As far as I
can see nothing wrong regarding adapter deletion after the commit
18dbdda89f5c:
i2c_dw_pci_probe()
{
...
i2c_add_numbered_adapter()
pm_runtime_enable_stuff()
...
}
i2c_dw_pci_remove()
{
...
pm_runtime_disable_stuff()
i2c_del_adapter()
...
}
Order is still practically the same in current i2c-designware-pcidrv.c
code but after this patch disabling/deletion is not done in reverse order.
