Re: [PATCH] iio: proximity: srf04: fix runtime PM autosuspend cleanup
Johan Hovold <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.kernel.iio,gmane.linux.kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Fri, Aug 07, 2026 at 05:02:32PM +0200, Joshua Crofts wrote: > On Fri, 7 Aug 2026 at 16:46, Guangshuo Li <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > srf04_probe() calls pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() when the optional > > power GPIO is present, but srf04_remove() does not call the matching > > pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() before disabling runtime PM. > > > > The runtime PM documentation requires pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() to > > be balanced with pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() when the driver is > > removed. Failing to do so can leave the autosuspend usage state > > unbalanced and may result in a usage_count leak when the autosuspend > > delay is negative. > > > > Add the missing pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() call in the remove > > path before disabling runtime PM. > > > > This issue was found by manual code inspection. > > > > Fixes: 2251157b335b4 ("iio: srf04: add power management feature") > > Signed-off-by: Guangshuo Li <[email protected]> > > --- > > Since this has a Fixes: tag it should also be marked for stable. I stumbled over this comment when looking into why these were marked for backporting (which I don't think they should be). And no, having a Fixes tag does not imply that you should CC stable. A Fixes tag indicates which commit introduced a bug, but that in itself does not imply that the fix meets the stable backport criteria. Johan