On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 03:44:25PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Tue, 27 Apr 2021, Johan Hovold wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 26, 2021 at 08:54:04PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > > pm_runtime_get_sync keeps a reference count on failure, which can lead > > > to leaks. pm_runtime_resume_and_get drops the reference count in the > > > failure case. This rule very conservatively follows the definition of > > > pm_runtime_resume_and_get to address the cases where the reference > > > count is unlikely to be needed in the failure case. > > > > > > pm_runtime_resume_and_get was introduced in > > > commit dd8088d5a896 ("PM: runtime: Add pm_runtime_resume_and_get to > > > deal with usage counter") > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Julia Lawall <julia.law...@inria.fr> > > > > As I've said elsewhere, not sure trying to do a mass conversion of this > > is a good idea. People may not be used to the interface, but it is > > consistent and has its use. The recent flurry of conversions show that > > those also risk introducing new bugs in code that is currently tested > > and correct. > > I looked some of the patches you commented on, and this rule would not > have transformed those cases. This rule is very restricted to ensure that > the transformed code follows the behavior of the new function.
Ah, ok. I didn't look too closely at the semantic patch itself and wrongly associated it with the all-or-nothing media subsystem conversions. Thanks for clarifying further in v3 too. Still a bit worried that this will push the cleanup crew to send more broken patches since it sends a signal that pm_runtime_get_sync() is always wrong. But guess there's not much to do about that now after having added pm_runtime_resume_and_get() in the first place. Johan _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci