Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
Felipe, On Apr 22, Greg KH wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:26:13AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:19:16PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: That way silly grass-hoppers like me won't have to go through the find-bisect-fix bug cycle, only to discover someone else already fixed it but the patch is floating around :-) yeah, maybe.. I don't want to merge my fixes into next though. Maybe Stephen could just merge both my branches on next. Greg, are you merging your usb-linus into linux-next ? Yes, both of my branches get merged into linux-next. Well, if it's not too much trouble, I'd really appreciate that you can find a way to include these -rc fixes in the branches that get merged in -next. Thanks! -- Ezequiel García, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android Engineering http://free-electrons.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-usb in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 08:29:17AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: Felipe, On Apr 22, Greg KH wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 10:26:13AM -0500, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:19:16PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: That way silly grass-hoppers like me won't have to go through the find-bisect-fix bug cycle, only to discover someone else already fixed it but the patch is floating around :-) yeah, maybe.. I don't want to merge my fixes into next though. Maybe Stephen could just merge both my branches on next. Greg, are you merging your usb-linus into linux-next ? Yes, both of my branches get merged into linux-next. Well, if it's not too much trouble, I'd really appreciate that you can find a way to include these -rc fixes in the branches that get merged in -next. done -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:01:28AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: On Apr 02, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi, On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 06:16:23PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: On 04/02/2014 06:05 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:46:51AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c index 3372ded..e2fd263 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c @@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ static int dsps_musb_exit(struct musb *musb) struct dsps_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(dev-parent); del_timer_sync(glue-timer); - usb_phy_shutdown(musb-xceiv); + debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); + return 0; } @@ -708,8 +709,6 @@ static int dsps_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) pm_runtime_put(pdev-dev); pm_runtime_disable(pdev-dev); - debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); I don't think this is the right fix. debugfs_remove_recursive is supposed to remove the directory as well. Why isn't dsps_musb_exit() called ? dsps_musb_exit() is called, hence my fix works :) The question is rather why dsps_remove() isn't called. For me, the fix looked obvious, as resources that are claimed in dsps_musb_init() should obviously be freed in its counterpart function, dsps_musb_exit(). For reasons of readability if not for any other :) you're correct, for whatever reason I read it as moving the lines the other way around (from _exit() to _remove()). I'll queue this once -rc1 is tagged. Felipe: This fix didn't land on -rc2, and it's not even in -next. Am I missing something? Is it possible to queue this as urgently as possible? Grass hopper, please... :-) http://marc.info/?l=linux-usbm=139809466025568w=2 By the way, I'd like to complain a bit about the debugfs patch :-) First, was it really necessary to error out in case the debugfs files failed to be created? Maybe we can simply omit the error check, unless there's some reason and we *need* to know if is succeeded. we *need* the error check, what we do with it can be different. Patches are welcome. Also, should we add a compile time option for that so that the debugfs can be disabled? why ? just disable CONFIG_DEBUG_FS -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 12:19:16PM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: On Apr 22, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:01:28AM -0300, Ezequiel Garcia wrote: On Apr 02, Felipe Balbi wrote: Hi, On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 06:16:23PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: On 04/02/2014 06:05 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:46:51AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c index 3372ded..e2fd263 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c @@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ static int dsps_musb_exit(struct musb *musb) struct dsps_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(dev-parent); del_timer_sync(glue-timer); - usb_phy_shutdown(musb-xceiv); + debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); + return 0; } @@ -708,8 +709,6 @@ static int dsps_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) pm_runtime_put(pdev-dev); pm_runtime_disable(pdev-dev); - debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); I don't think this is the right fix. debugfs_remove_recursive is supposed to remove the directory as well. Why isn't dsps_musb_exit() called ? dsps_musb_exit() is called, hence my fix works :) The question is rather why dsps_remove() isn't called. For me, the fix looked obvious, as resources that are claimed in dsps_musb_init() should obviously be freed in its counterpart function, dsps_musb_exit(). For reasons of readability if not for any other :) you're correct, for whatever reason I read it as moving the lines the other way around (from _exit() to _remove()). I'll queue this once -rc1 is tagged. Felipe: This fix didn't land on -rc2, and it's not even in -next. Am I missing something? Is it possible to queue this as urgently as possible? Grass hopper, please... :-) http://marc.info/?l=linux-usbm=139809466025568w=2 Oh, nice. Thanks for taking care of this! Is there any strong reason for the fixes branch not being part of -next? Or maybe you should push the patches to your next branch, instead? I found functionality breaks *very* frequently on early -rc, and it's usually quicker to take a peek at -next and see if somebody already fixed it. That way silly grass-hoppers like me won't have to go through the find-bisect-fix bug cycle, only to discover someone else already fixed it but the patch is floating around :-) yeah, maybe.. I don't want to merge my fixes into next though. Maybe Stephen could just merge both my branches on next. Greg, are you merging your usb-linus into linux-next ? -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:46:51AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: When the platform initialization fails due to missing resources, it will return -EPROBE_DEFER after dsps_musb_init() has been called. dsps_musb_init() calls dsps_musb_dbg_init() to allocate the debugfs nodes. At a later point in time, the probe will be retried, and dsps_musb_dbg_init() will be called again. debugfs_create_dir() will fail this time, as the node already exists, and so the entire device probe will fail with -ENOMEM. Fix this by moving debugfs_remove_recursive() from dsps_remove() to the plaform's exit function, so it will be cleanly torn down when the probe fails. It also feels more natural this way, as .exit is the counterpart to .init. Signed-off-by: Daniel Mack zon...@gmail.com --- Only the current 'next' branch which will be merged into 3.15 is affected. drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c | 5 ++--- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c index 3372ded..e2fd263 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c @@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ static int dsps_musb_exit(struct musb *musb) struct dsps_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(dev-parent); del_timer_sync(glue-timer); - usb_phy_shutdown(musb-xceiv); + debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); + return 0; } @@ -708,8 +709,6 @@ static int dsps_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) pm_runtime_put(pdev-dev); pm_runtime_disable(pdev-dev); - debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); I don't think this is the right fix. debugfs_remove_recursive is supposed to remove the directory as well. Why isn't dsps_musb_exit() called ? I can see it being called from musb_remove() - musb_shutdown() - musb_platform_exit(). Looks like the problem is elsewhere. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
On 04/02/2014 06:05 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:46:51AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c index 3372ded..e2fd263 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c @@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ static int dsps_musb_exit(struct musb *musb) struct dsps_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(dev-parent); del_timer_sync(glue-timer); - usb_phy_shutdown(musb-xceiv); +debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); + return 0; } @@ -708,8 +709,6 @@ static int dsps_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) pm_runtime_put(pdev-dev); pm_runtime_disable(pdev-dev); -debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); I don't think this is the right fix. debugfs_remove_recursive is supposed to remove the directory as well. Why isn't dsps_musb_exit() called ? dsps_musb_exit() is called, hence my fix works :) The question is rather why dsps_remove() isn't called. For me, the fix looked obvious, as resources that are claimed in dsps_musb_init() should obviously be freed in its counterpart function, dsps_musb_exit(). For reasons of readability if not for any other :) Daniel -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-usb in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH] USB: musb: dsps: move debugfs_remove_recursive()
Hi, On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 06:16:23PM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: On 04/02/2014 06:05 PM, Felipe Balbi wrote: On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:46:51AM +0200, Daniel Mack wrote: diff --git a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c index 3372ded..e2fd263 100644 --- a/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c +++ b/drivers/usb/musb/musb_dsps.c @@ -470,8 +470,9 @@ static int dsps_musb_exit(struct musb *musb) struct dsps_glue *glue = dev_get_drvdata(dev-parent); del_timer_sync(glue-timer); - usb_phy_shutdown(musb-xceiv); + debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); + return 0; } @@ -708,8 +709,6 @@ static int dsps_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) pm_runtime_put(pdev-dev); pm_runtime_disable(pdev-dev); - debugfs_remove_recursive(glue-dbgfs_root); I don't think this is the right fix. debugfs_remove_recursive is supposed to remove the directory as well. Why isn't dsps_musb_exit() called ? dsps_musb_exit() is called, hence my fix works :) The question is rather why dsps_remove() isn't called. For me, the fix looked obvious, as resources that are claimed in dsps_musb_init() should obviously be freed in its counterpart function, dsps_musb_exit(). For reasons of readability if not for any other :) you're correct, for whatever reason I read it as moving the lines the other way around (from _exit() to _remove()). I'll queue this once -rc1 is tagged. -- balbi signature.asc Description: Digital signature
