5.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> [ Upstream commit 6f63af7511e7058f3fa4ad5b8102210741c9f947 ] We don't need to hold the prepare_lock when dropping a ref on a struct clk_core. The release function is only freeing memory and any code with a pointer reference has already unlinked anything pointing to the clk_core. This reduces the holding area of the prepare_lock a bit. Note that we also don't call free_clk() with the prepare_lock held. There isn't any reason to do that. Reviewed-by: Douglas Anderson <dianders@xxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Stephen Boyd <sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240325184204.745706-3-sboyd@xxxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> --- drivers/clk/clk.c | 12 +++++------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/clk/clk.c b/drivers/clk/clk.c index 59a77587da47b..56be3f97c265a 100644 --- a/drivers/clk/clk.c +++ b/drivers/clk/clk.c @@ -4061,7 +4061,8 @@ void clk_unregister(struct clk *clk) if (clk->core->ops == &clk_nodrv_ops) { pr_err("%s: unregistered clock: %s\n", __func__, clk->core->name); - goto unlock; + clk_prepare_unlock(); + return; } /* * Assign empty clock ops for consumers that might still hold @@ -4092,11 +4093,10 @@ void clk_unregister(struct clk *clk) if (clk->core->protect_count) pr_warn("%s: unregistering protected clock: %s\n", __func__, clk->core->name); + clk_prepare_unlock(); kref_put(&clk->core->ref, __clk_release); free_clk(clk); -unlock: - clk_prepare_unlock(); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(clk_unregister); @@ -4258,13 +4258,11 @@ void __clk_put(struct clk *clk) clk->max_rate < clk->core->req_rate) clk_core_set_rate_nolock(clk->core, clk->core->req_rate); - owner = clk->core->owner; - kref_put(&clk->core->ref, __clk_release); - clk_prepare_unlock(); + owner = clk->core->owner; + kref_put(&clk->core->ref, __clk_release); module_put(owner); - free_clk(clk); } -- 2.43.0
