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;
Date:   Tue, 28 Apr 2020 13:18:42 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>, Zou Wei <zou_wei@huawei.com>,
        bcm-kernel-feedback-list@broadcom.com,
        linux-serial@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] tty: serial: bcm63xx: fix missing clk_put() in
 bcm63xx_uart
Message-ID: <20200428111842.GA1159152@kroah.com>
References: <1587472306-105155-1-git-send-email-zou_wei@huawei.com>
 <4cd8f963-9292-faef-1e24-df90821274d6@suse.cz>
 <73c4cebb-467b-e5d5-89bf-8a6fe29cf858@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <73c4cebb-467b-e5d5-89bf-8a6fe29cf858@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 10:29:58AM -0700, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
> 
> 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.

Ugh, can you send a revert for this please?

thanks,

greg k-h