Hello Geert,
On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 11:32:15AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> Runtime PM should be enabled before calling pwmchip_add(), as PWM users
> can appear immediately after the PWM chip has been added.
> Likewise, Runtime PM should always be disabled after the removal of the
> PWM chip, even if the latter failed.
>
> Fixes: 99b82abb0a35b073 ("pwm: Add Renesas TPU PWM driver")
> Signed-off-by: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> drivers/pwm/pwm-renesas-tpu.c | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/pwm/pwm-renesas-tpu.c b/drivers/pwm/pwm-renesas-tpu.c
> index 4a855a21b782dea3..8032acc84161a9dd 100644
> --- a/drivers/pwm/pwm-renesas-tpu.c
> +++ b/drivers/pwm/pwm-renesas-tpu.c
> @@ -415,16 +415,17 @@ static int tpu_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> tpu->chip.base = -1;
> tpu->chip.npwm = TPU_CHANNEL_MAX;
>
> + pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> +
> ret = pwmchip_add(&tpu->chip);
> if (ret < 0) {
> dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to register PWM chip\n");
> + pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> return ret;
> }
>
> dev_info(&pdev->dev, "TPU PWM %d registered\n", tpu->pdev->id);
>
> - pm_runtime_enable(&pdev->dev);
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -434,12 +435,10 @@ static int tpu_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> int ret;
>
> ret = pwmchip_remove(&tpu->chip);
> - if (ret)
> - return ret;
>
> pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
>
> - return 0;
> + return ret;
> }
Maybe I was a bit quick with my reply to the previous patch. I wonder if
it is right to call pm_runtime_disable if pwmchip_remove failed?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | https://www.pengutronix.de/ |
