✗ CI.checkpatch: warning for Revert "drm/xe: make gt_remove use devm" (rev2)
Patchwork
patchwork at emeril.freedesktop.org
Wed May 29 16:07:47 UTC 2024
== Series Details ==
Series: Revert "drm/xe: make gt_remove use devm" (rev2)
URL : https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/134149/
State : warning
== Summary ==
+ KERNEL=/kernel
+ git clone https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/maintainer-tools mt
Cloning into 'mt'...
warning: redirecting to https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/maintainer-tools.git/
+ git -C mt rev-list -n1 origin/master
51ce9f6cd981d42d7467409d7dbc559a450abc1e
+ cd /kernel
+ git config --global --add safe.directory /kernel
+ git log -n1
commit 8a7b48d637bbac89e1e4b4a4b4fc62da1edd8c0b
Author: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com>
Date: Tue May 28 11:23:54 2024 -0700
Revert "drm/xe: make gt_remove use devm"
The gt_remove function was explictly added as part of the remove flow
instead of using drmm/devm automatic cleanup due to it being illegal
to remove a component after the driver has been detached from the pci
device; the GSC proxy component is removed as part of gt_remove, so we
need to do it in the pci cleanup flow. The function already has a
comment above it to explain this.
Note that the change to use the devm also caused an invalid pointer
deref in the gsc_proxy unbind function, but I didn't bother to debug
which pointer was bad since we shouldn't be calling the unbind that
late anyway and this revert fixes it.
Both issue were not seen in CI because the GSC loading is temporarily
disabled due to a critical bug, which means we're not binding the
component.
Signed-off-by: Daniele Ceraolo Spurio <daniele.ceraolospurio at intel.com>
Cc: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
Cc: Andrzej Hajda <andrzej.hajda at intel.com>
Cc: Rodrigo Vivi <rodrigo.vivi at intel.com>
Reviewed-by: Matthew Auld <matthew.auld at intel.com>
+ /mt/dim checkpatch fc8c84173ee4de00aaea8235be8442b50af5454a drm-intel
8a7b48d637bb Revert "drm/xe: make gt_remove use devm"
-:6: WARNING:TYPO_SPELLING: 'explictly' may be misspelled - perhaps 'explicitly'?
#6:
The gt_remove function was explictly added as part of the remove flow
^^^^^^^^^
total: 0 errors, 1 warnings, 0 checks, 97 lines checked
More information about the Intel-xe
mailing list