Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220909145942.844102-1-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220909145942.844102-1-horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
From:   Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 9 Sep 2022 18:09:01 +0300
Message-ID: <CAHp75VfNjQTVjsjWNJ1oOGuovxt_=ZEZrEfTvj=-Ym9R_ZzPoQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] pinctrl: ocelot: Fix interrupt controller
To:     Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@microchip.com>
Cc:     "open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
        Microchip Linux Driver Support <UNGLinuxDriver@microchip.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 5:55 PM Horatiu Vultur
<horatiu.vultur@microchip.com> wrote:

Thanks for an update, my comments below.

...

> -       dev_set_drvdata(dev, info->map);
> +       dev_set_drvdata(dev, info);

I would also change it to platform_set_drvdata() to keep symmetry with
->remove().

...

> +static int ocelot_pinctrl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +       struct ocelot_pinctrl *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);

> +       destroy_workqueue(info->wq);

Is it a synchronous operation? Anyway, what does guarantee that after
this no other task can schedule a new work due to unmasking an
interrupt? I think you need to be sure your device is quiescent before
killing that workqueue. Something like synchronize_irq() +
disable_irq() or equivalent? (I don't know for sure, you need to
investigate it yourself and find the best suitable way).

> +       return 0;
> +}

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko