Am Thu, 5 Dec 2024 22:54:05 +0100 schrieb Karol P <karprzy7@xxxxxxxxx>: > On Tue, 26 Nov 2024 at 23:06, Andreas Kemnade <andreas@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Am Tue, 19 Nov 2024 16:16:42 +0200 > > schrieb Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > On 19/11/2024 15:56, Andreas Kemnade wrote: > > > > Am Tue, 19 Nov 2024 15:10:23 +0200 > > > > schrieb Roger Quadros <rogerq@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > > > > > >> Hi, > > > >> > > > >> On 13/11/2024 23:16, Karol Przybylski wrote: > > > >>> clk_prepare() is called in usbtll_omap_probe to fill clk array. > > > >>> Return code is not checked, leaving possible error condition unhandled. > > > >>> > > > >>> Added variable to hold return value from clk_prepare() and dev_dbg statement > > > >>> when it's not successful. > > > >>> > > > >>> Found in coverity scan, CID 1594680 > > > >>> > > > >>> Signed-off-by: Karol Przybylski <karprzy7@xxxxxxxxx> > > > >>> --- > > > >>> drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c | 11 +++++++---- > > > >>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > > >>> > > > >>> diff --git a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c > > > >>> index 0f7fdb99c809..2e9319ee1b74 100644 > > > >>> --- a/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c > > > >>> +++ b/drivers/mfd/omap-usb-tll.c > > > >>> @@ -202,7 +202,7 @@ static int usbtll_omap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > >>> struct device *dev = &pdev->dev; > > > >>> struct usbtll_omap *tll; > > > >>> void __iomem *base; > > > >>> - int i, nch, ver; > > > >>> + int i, nch, ver, err; > > > >>> > > > >>> dev_dbg(dev, "starting TI HSUSB TLL Controller\n"); > > > >>> > > > >>> @@ -248,10 +248,13 @@ static int usbtll_omap_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > >>> "usb_tll_hs_usb_ch%d_clk", i); > > > >>> tll->ch_clk[i] = clk_get(dev, clkname); > > > >>> > > > >>> - if (IS_ERR(tll->ch_clk[i])) > > > >>> + if (IS_ERR(tll->ch_clk[i])) { > > > >>> dev_dbg(dev, "can't get clock : %s\n", clkname); > > > > > > > > if you want dev_err() later, then why not here? > > > > > > Because clk is optional. If it is not there then we should not complain. > > > But if it is there then it needs to be enabled successfully. > > > > > I guess you mean *prepared*, the clock is enabled later (with error > > checking). But your reasoning makes sense. > > > > > > > > > >>> - else > > > >>> - clk_prepare(tll->ch_clk[i]); > > > >>> + } else { > > > >>> + err = clk_prepare(tll->ch_clk[i]); > > > >>> + if (err) > > > >>> + dev_dbg(dev, "clock prepare error for: %s\n", clkname); > > > >> > > > >> dev_err()? > > > >> > > > > So why do you want a different return handling here? (I doubt there is > > > > any clock having a real prepare() involved here) > > > > > > > > As said in an earlier incarnation of this patch, the real question is > > > > whether having partial clocks available is a valid operating scenario. > > > > If yes, then the error should be ignored. If no, then bailing out early > > > > is a good idea. > > > > > > In the DT binding, clocks is optional. So if it doesn't exist it is not > > > an error condition. > > > > > > > > > > > clk_prepare() errors are catched by failing clk_enable() later, > > > > ch_clk[i] is checked later, too. > > > > > > > >> I think we should return the error in this case. > > > >> (after unpreparing the prepared clocks and clk_put()) > > > >> > > > > and pm_runtime_put_sync(dev) > > > > which can probably be done before dealing with the clocks. It is only > > needed for the register access. > > I'm fairly new to this subsystem and I'm trying to understand the > conclusion. In the end, we should add dev_err() here after > clk_prepare() with appropriate handling? > we must make sure pm_runtime_put/get are paired and _put is called in any case. Looking around a bit: I think a good solution would be along this lines: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-omap/34ab5f0b78c2869cc43797a72d6a2f40d9b246f3.camel@xxxxxxxxxxx/T/#u using devm_clk_get_prepared() things can be simplified. Regards, Andreas