Hi, On 19. 4. 16. 오후 11:29, Dmitry Osipenko wrote: > 16.04.2019 5:32, Chanwoo Choi пишет: >> Hi, >> >> patch6/7/8/9 are for handling of exception handling in probe() function. >> Actually, I'm not sure that there are special reason to split out >> the patches. I think that you can squash patch6/7/8/9 to only one patch. > > Indeed, I was rebasing and reordering patches multiple times and looks like there is no reason not to squash these patches now. > >> Also, even if patch6/7/8/9 handle the exception handling in probe(), >> the tegra_devfreq_probe() doesn't support the restoring sequence >> when fail happen. I think that if you want to fix the fail case of probe(), >> please add the restoring sequence about following function. >> - clk_disable_unprepare() >> - clk_notifier_unregister() >> - dev_pm_opp_remove() > > When all of 6/7/8/9 patches are applied, the clk_notifier_register() becomes the last invocation of the probe function and clk_enable() is kept at the first place of the probe order. Hence the sequence you're suggesting is already incorrect because error-unwinding order usually should be opposite to the probe order. It looks to me that the current final result of these patches is already correct. You're right. When I replied it, I have not considered the order. Sorry, it made you some confusion. > > -- Best Regards, Chanwoo Choi Samsung Electronics
