Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] tty: serial: bcm63xx: fix missing clk_put() in
 bcm63xx_uart
To:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, Zou Wei <zou_wei@huawei.com>,
        gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <1587472306-105155-1-git-send-email-zou_wei@huawei.com>
 <4cd8f963-9292-faef-1e24-df90821274d6@suse.cz>
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <73c4cebb-467b-e5d5-89bf-8a6fe29cf858@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 27 Apr 2020 10:29:58 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101
 Firefox/68.0 Thunderbird/68.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <4cd8f963-9292-faef-1e24-df90821274d6@suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 4/26/2020 11:19 PM, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 21. 04. 20, 14:31, Zou Wei wrote:
>> This patch fixes below error reported by coccicheck
>>
>> drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c:848:2-8: ERROR: missing clk_put;
>> clk_get on line 842 and execution via conditional on line 846
>>
>> Fixes: ab4382d27412 ("tty: move drivers/serial/ to drivers/tty/serial/")
>> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@huawei.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Zou Wei <zou_wei@huawei.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c | 4 +++-
>>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c b/drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c
>> index 5674da2..ed0aa5c 100644
>> --- a/drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c
>> +++ b/drivers/tty/serial/bcm63xx_uart.c
>> @@ -843,8 +843,10 @@ static int bcm_uart_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>  	if (IS_ERR(clk) && pdev->dev.of_node)
>>  		clk = of_clk_get(pdev->dev.of_node, 0);
>>  
>> -	if (IS_ERR(clk))
>> +	if (IS_ERR(clk)) {
>> +		clk_put(clk);
> 
> Why would you want to put an erroneous clk?

Doh, somehow I completely missed, you are right this does not look legit.
-- 
Florian