On Fri, Apr 13, 2018 at 02:48:19PM +0200, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, Apr 10, 2018 at 06:17:04PM +0200, Marek Vasut wrote: > > On 04/10/2018 05:28 PM, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > ... > > > >>> rcar_pcie_get_resources() is called while the device is > > >>> runtime-enabled/resumed, > > >>> pci_free_resource_list() is called while the device is runtime-disabled. > > > > rcar_pcie_get_resources() is NOT a pair function for > > pci_free_resource_list() . rcar_pcie_parse_request_of_pci_ranges() is a > > pair function for pci_free_resource_list(). > > > > rcar_pcie_parse_request_of_pci_ranges() calls > > of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() internally, so every single function > > called after successful call of rcar_pcie_parse_request_of_pci_ranges() > > must call pci_free_resource_list(). > > > > Both of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() and pci_free_resource_list() are > > called with runtime PM disabled. > > > > The naming of the functions is confusing though. > > Hi, > > thanks everyone for their efforts in preparing/reviewing this patch. > > It seems there are some differences of opinion on how best to handle the > error paths but unlike earlier versions this one seems correct to me. If > that turns out to be false we can address it. But I don't think its likely > things will be enhanced by continuing this review. > > Lorenzo, please consider taking this patch in its current form. I will as soon as we restart queueing patches for v4.18, thanks for the heads-up. Lorenzo
