On Fri, 2019-07-19 at 02:57 +0000, Anson Huang wrote: > > > I do worry that handling the irq before the rtc device is registered could > > still > > result in a crash. From what I saw, the irq path in snvs only uses driver > > state > > members that are fully initialized for the most part, and the allocated but > > unregistered data->rtc is only used in one call to rtc_update_irq(), which > > appears to be ok with this. > > > > But it is not that hard to imagine that something could go into the rtc core > > that assumes call like rtc_update_irq() are only made on registered devices. > > > > If there was a way to do it, I think allocating the irq in a masked state > > and > > then unmasking it as part of the final registration call to make the device > > go > > live would be a safer and more general pattern. > > It makes sense, I think we can just move the devm_request_irq() to after > rtc_register_device(), > It will make sure everything is ready before IRQ is enabled. Will send out a > V2 patch.
That will mean registering the rtc, then unregistering it if the irq request fails. More of a pain to write this failure path. Alexandre, is it part of rtc core design that rtc_update_irq() might be called on a rtc device that is properly allocated, but not registered yet?
