On Di, 2024-04-30 at 10:37 +0200, Herve Codina wrote: > From: Clément Léger <clement.leger@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > Since the rcdev structure is allocated by the reset controller drivers > themselves, they need to exists as long as there is a consumer. A call to > module_get() is already existing but that does not work when using > device-tree overlays. In order to guarantee that the underlying reset > controller device does not vanish while using it, add a get_device() call > when retrieving a reset control from a reset controller device and a > put_device() when releasing that control. > > Signed-off-by: Clément Léger <clement.leger@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Herve Codina <herve.codina@xxxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/reset/core.c | 2 ++ > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/reset/core.c b/drivers/reset/core.c > index dba74e857be6..999c3c41cf21 100644 > --- a/drivers/reset/core.c > +++ b/drivers/reset/core.c > @@ -812,6 +812,7 @@ __reset_control_get_internal(struct reset_controller_dev *rcdev, > kref_init(&rstc->refcnt); > rstc->acquired = acquired; > rstc->shared = shared; > + get_device(rcdev->dev); > Looks good to me, but can we put this right after the try_module_get() above ... > return rstc; > } > @@ -826,6 +827,7 @@ static void __reset_control_release(struct kref *kref) > module_put(rstc->rcdev->owner); > > list_del(&rstc->list); > + put_device(rstc->rcdev->dev); ... and this right before module_put()? regards Philipp
