Hi Philipp Zabel,
Thanks for the feedback.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philipp Zabel <p.zabel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: 27 January 2025 14:04
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/12] irqchip/renesas-rzv2h: Use devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted()
>
> On Mo, 2025-01-27 at 11:36 +0000, Biju Das wrote:
> > Use devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted() to simplify
> > rzv2h_icu_init().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > v1->v2:
> > * Split the simplification patch into two.
> > * Updated commit header and description.
> > * Replaced devm_reset_control_get_optional_exclusive_deasserted()->
> > devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted().
> > * Moved simplification using devm_pm_runtime_enable() to next patch.
> > ---
> > drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzv2h.c | 10 ++--------
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzv2h.c
> > b/drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzv2h.c
> > index fd432b43506b..5c5d2e015a88 100644
> > --- a/drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzv2h.c
> > +++ b/drivers/irqchip/irq-renesas-rzv2h.c
> > @@ -456,15 +456,10 @@ static int rzv2h_icu_init(struct device_node *node, struct device_node
> *parent)
> > goto put_dev;
> > }
> >
> > - resetn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive(&pdev->dev, NULL);
> > + resetn = devm_reset_control_get_exclusive_deasserted(&pdev->dev,
> > +NULL);
> > if (IS_ERR(resetn)) {
> > ret = PTR_ERR(resetn);
> > - goto put_dev;
> > - }
> > -
> > - ret = reset_control_deassert(resetn);
> > - if (ret) {
> > - dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to deassert resetn pin, %d\n", ret);
> > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to acquire deasserted reset: %d\n",
> > +ret);
> > goto put_dev;
> > }
> >
> > @@ -495,7 +490,6 @@ static int rzv2h_icu_init(struct device_node *node, struct device_node *parent)
> > pm_runtime_put(&pdev->dev);
> > pm_disable:
> > pm_runtime_disable(&pdev->dev);
> > - reset_control_assert(resetn);
> > put_dev:
> > put_device(&pdev->dev);
>
> This is mixing devres cleanup and manual cleanup in a way that is not obviously safe. Specifically,
> put_device() will be called before the reset control is asserted in the error path. To keep asserting
> the reset control first, put_device() could be called via devm_add_action_or_reset().
OK, I will add devm_add_action_or_reset() to call put_device() in case of error in probe().
Cheers,
Biju
