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:   Mon, 16 Nov 2020 10:26:07 +0100
From:   Marco Felsch <m.felsch@pengutronix.de>
To:     Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@gmail.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Zhang Changzhong <zhangchangzhong@huawei.com>, andrew@lunn.ch,
        hkallweit1@gmail.com, linux@armlinux.org.uk, davem@davemloft.net,
        netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: phy: smsc: add missed clk_disable_unprepare in
 smsc_phy_probe()
Message-ID: <20201116092607.psaelzuga3kcrryu@pengutronix.de>
References: <1605180239-1792-1-git-send-email-zhangchangzhong@huawei.com>
 <20201114112625.440b52f2@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
 <fc03d4de-14d2-1b61-ac9b-40ea26e6fa9a@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <fc03d4de-14d2-1b61-ac9b-40ea26e6fa9a@gmail.com>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2)
Precedence: bulk

On 20-11-14 11:45, Florian Fainelli wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/14/2020 11:26 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 19:23:59 +0800 Zhang Changzhong wrote:
> >> Add the missing clk_disable_unprepare() before return from
> >> smsc_phy_probe() in the error handling case.
> >>
> >> Fixes: bedd8d78aba3 ("net: phy: smsc: LAN8710/20: add phy refclk in support")
> >> Reported-by: Hulk Robot <hulkci@huawei.com>
> >> Signed-off-by: Zhang Changzhong <zhangchangzhong@huawei.com>
> >> ---
> >>  drivers/net/phy/smsc.c | 4 +++-
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/smsc.c b/drivers/net/phy/smsc.c
> >> index ec97669..0fc39ac 100644
> >> --- a/drivers/net/phy/smsc.c
> >> +++ b/drivers/net/phy/smsc.c
> >> @@ -291,8 +291,10 @@ static int smsc_phy_probe(struct phy_device *phydev)
> >>  		return ret;
> >>  
> >>  	ret = clk_set_rate(priv->refclk, 50 * 1000 * 1000);
> >> -	if (ret)
> >> +	if (ret) {
> >> +		clk_disable_unprepare(priv->refclk);
> >>  		return ret;
> >> +	}
> >>  
> >>  	return 0;
> >>  }
> > 
> > Applied, thanks!
> > 
> > The code right above looks highly questionable as well:
> > 
> >         priv->refclk = clk_get_optional(dev, NULL);
> >         if (IS_ERR(priv->refclk))
> >                 dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(priv->refclk), "Failed to request clock\n");
> >  
> >         ret = clk_prepare_enable(priv->refclk);
> >         if (ret)
> >                 return ret;
> > 
> > I don't think clk_prepare_enable() will be too happy to see an error
> > pointer. This should probably be:
> > 
> >         priv->refclk = clk_get_optional(dev, NULL);
> >         if (IS_ERR(priv->refclk))
> >                 return dev_err_probe(dev, PTR_ERR(priv->refclk), 
> > 				      "Failed to request clock\n");
> 
> Right, especially if EPROBE_DEFER must be returned because the clock
> provider is not ready yet, we should have a chance to do that.

Hi,

damn.. I missed the return here. Thanks for covering that. Should I send
a fix or did you do that already?

Regards,
  Marco