| Message ID | cover.1693070958.git.christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | HID: nvidia-shield: Fix the error handling path of shield_probe() | expand |
Hi Christophe, On Sat, 26 Aug, 2023 19:42:16 +0200 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of > the probe. > > Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 > patches) > > Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. > > > *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in > thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. > > My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are > allocated, such as: > led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); > power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); > if (ts->haptics_dev) > input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); > ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); > This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the > changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. > > Christophe JAILLET (3): > HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the > probe error handling path > HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe > error handling path > HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() > > drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) I was wondering if you have time to address the comments in this submission. If not, I can re-spin the patches with the needed changes in upcoming days. -- Thanks, Rahul Rameshbabu
Le 15/09/2023 à 20:16, Rahul Rameshbabu a écrit : > Hi Christophe, > > On Sat, 26 Aug, 2023 19:42:16 +0200 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of >> the probe. >> >> Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 >> patches) >> >> Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. >> >> >> *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in >> thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. >> >> My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are >> allocated, such as: >> led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); >> power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); >> if (ts->haptics_dev) >> input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); >> ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); >> This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the >> changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. >> >> Christophe JAILLET (3): >> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the >> probe error handling path >> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe >> error handling path >> HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() >> >> drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- >> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > I was wondering if you have time to address the comments in this > submission. If not, I can re-spin the patches with the needed changes in > upcoming days. I can send an update tomorrow, but I'm only working with -next, so should using for-6.6/nvidia (as said in your comment in #1/3) be a must have, then it would be more convenient for me if you make the changes by yourself. CJ > > -- > Thanks, > > Rahul Rameshbabu >
On Fri, 15 Sep, 2023 22:14:18 +0200 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: > Le 15/09/2023 à 20:16, Rahul Rameshbabu a écrit : >> Hi Christophe, >> On Sat, 26 Aug, 2023 19:42:16 +0200 Christophe JAILLET >> <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >>> This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of >>> the probe. >>> >>> Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 >>> patches) >>> >>> Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. >>> >>> >>> *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in >>> thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. >>> >>> My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are >>> allocated, such as: >>> led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); >>> power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); >>> if (ts->haptics_dev) >>> input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); >>> ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); >>> This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the >>> changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. >>> >>> Christophe JAILLET (3): >>> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the >>> probe error handling path >>> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe >>> error handling path >>> HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() >>> >>> drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- >>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> I was wondering if you have time to address the comments in this >> submission. If not, I can re-spin the patches with the needed changes in >> upcoming days. > > I can send an update tomorrow, but I'm only working with -next, so should using > for-6.6/nvidia (as said in your comment in #1/3) be a must have, then it would > be more convenient for me if you make the changes by yourself. Luckily, it does not have to be on top of for-6.6/nvidia to add the fix I mentioned with regards to the led_classdev flag for not trying to power off the led when unregistering the led_classdev. That should still merge nicely on top of for-6.6/nvidia. The main reason I mentioned it was due to the commit living there with regards to the issue involving unregistering the led_classdev without the mentioned flag. -- Thanks for the patches, Rahul Rameshbabu > > CJ > >> -- >> Thanks, >> Rahul Rameshbabu >>
Le 15/09/2023 à 22:51, Rahul Rameshbabu a écrit : > On Fri, 15 Sep, 2023 22:14:18 +0200 Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >> Le 15/09/2023 à 20:16, Rahul Rameshbabu a écrit : >>> Hi Christophe, >>> On Sat, 26 Aug, 2023 19:42:16 +0200 Christophe JAILLET >>> <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> wrote: >>>> This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of >>>> the probe. >>>> >>>> Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 >>>> patches) >>>> >>>> Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. >>>> >>>> >>>> *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in >>>> thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. >>>> >>>> My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are >>>> allocated, such as: >>>> led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); >>>> power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); >>>> if (ts->haptics_dev) >>>> input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); >>>> ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); >>>> This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the >>>> changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. >>>> >>>> Christophe JAILLET (3): >>>> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the >>>> probe error handling path >>>> HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe >>>> error handling path >>>> HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() >>>> >>>> drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- >>>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >>> I was wondering if you have time to address the comments in this >>> submission. If not, I can re-spin the patches with the needed changes in >>> upcoming days. >> >> I can send an update tomorrow, but I'm only working with -next, so should using >> for-6.6/nvidia (as said in your comment in #1/3) be a must have, then it would >> be more convenient for me if you make the changes by yourself. > > Luckily, it does not have to be on top of for-6.6/nvidia to add the fix > I mentioned with regards to the led_classdev flag for not trying to > power off the led when unregistering the led_classdev. That should still > merge nicely on top of for-6.6/nvidia. The main reason I mentioned it > was due to the commit living there with regards to the issue involving > unregistering the led_classdev without the mentioned flag. Well, because of your comment on patch #1/3, I would prefer you to make the relevant changes. Understanding this code if more time consuming than I first expected. CJ > > -- > Thanks for the patches, > > Rahul Rameshbabu > >> >> CJ >> >>> -- >>> Thanks, >>> Rahul Rameshbabu >>> >
This serie fixes some missing clean-up function calls in the error handling of the probe. Patch 1 and 2 fix some similar issues introduced in 2 different commits (hence 2 patches) Patch 3 is a proposal to be more future proof. *Note*: I'm not 100% sure that the order of the functions is the best one in thunderstrike_destroy(), but it is the way it was. My personal preference would be to undo things in reverse order they are allocated, such as: led_classdev_unregister(&ts->led_dev); power_supply_unregister(ts->base.battery_dev.psy); if (ts->haptics_dev) input_unregister_device(ts->haptics_dev); ida_free(&thunderstrike_ida, ts->id); This order was explicitly chnaged by 3ab196f88237, so, as I can't test the changes on a real harware, I've left it as-is. Christophe JAILLET (3): HID: nvidia-shield: Fix a missing led_classdev_unregister() in the probe error handling path HID: nvidia-shield: Fix some missing function calls() in the probe error handling path HID: nvidia-shield: Introduce thunderstrike_destroy() drivers/hid/hid-nvidia-shield.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)