On Mon, May 06, 2024 at 07:48:49PM +0530, Beleswar Padhi wrote:
> In case of errors during core start operation from sysfs, the driver
> directly returns with the -EPERM error code. Fix this to ensure that
> mailbox channels are freed on error before returning by jumping to the
> 'put_mbox' error handling label. Similarly, jump to the 'out' error
> handling label to return with required -EPERM error code during the
> core stop operation from sysfs.
>
> Fixes: 3c8a9066d584 ("remoteproc: k3-r5: Do not allow core1 to power up
> before core0 via sysfs")
>
> Signed-off-by: Beleswar Padhi <[email protected]>
> ---
> As stated in the bug-report[0], Smatch complains that:
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c:583 k3_r5_rproc_start() warn:
> missing unwind goto?
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c:651 k3_r5_rproc_stop() warn: missing
> unwind goto?
>
> This patch addresses the warnings by jumping to appropriate error
> labels in case an error occurs during start/stop operation from sysfs.
>
> [0]-https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
>
> drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> index 1799b4f6d11e..50e486bcfa10 100644
> --- a/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> +++ b/drivers/remoteproc/ti_k3_r5_remoteproc.c
> @@ -580,7 +580,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_start(struct rproc *rproc)
> if (core != core0 && core0->rproc->state == RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> dev_err(dev, "%s: can not start core 1 before core 0\n",
> __func__);
> - return -EPERM;
> + ret = -EPERM;
> + goto put_mbox;
> }
>
> ret = k3_r5_core_run(core);
> @@ -648,7 +649,8 @@ static int k3_r5_rproc_stop(struct rproc *rproc)
> if (core != core1 && core1->rproc->state != RPROC_OFFLINE) {
> dev_err(dev, "%s: can not stop core 0 before core 1\n",
> __func__);
> - return -EPERM;
> + ret = -EPERM;
> + goto out;
> }
Applied
Thanks,
Mathieu
>
> ret = k3_r5_core_halt(core);
> --
> 2.34.1
>
