Re: [PATCH] drm/exynos: g2d: fix autosuspend cleanup on probe failure

Hi Krzysztof,

On Thu, 20 Aug 2026 at 22:49, Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On 08/08/2026 14:17, Guangshuo Li wrote:
> > g2d_probe() calls pm_runtime_use_autosuspend(), but its failure path
> > does not call the matching pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() before
> > disabling runtime PM.
> >
> > If the autosuspend delay is set to a negative value while autosuspend
> > is enabled, the runtime PM core increments usage_count to prevent
> > runtime suspend. Without calling pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend()
> > during cleanup, this reference is not dropped and usage_count remains
> > unbalanced.
> >
> > The documentation for pm_runtime_use_autosuspend() also notes that it
> > is important to undo it with pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() at
> > driver exit time, unless runtime PM was initially enabled with
> > devm_pm_runtime_enable().
> >
> > Add the missing pm_runtime_dont_use_autosuspend() call to the probe
> > failure path before disabling runtime PM.
> >
> > This issue was found by manual code inspection.
> >
> > Fixes: d7f1642c90ab ("drm/exynos: add G2D driver")
> > Cc: [email protected]
> > Signed-off-by: Guangshuo Li <[email protected]>
> > ---
>
> You sent vast amount of patches, all separate, making it very difficult
> to track and respond in efficient way. Do not do that.
>
> Group your work per subsystem.
>
> You were asked to clarify and respond to incorrect fixes statement. I do
> not see how you clarified and responded at all.
>
> Best regards,
> Krzysztof

Sorry about that. I should have replied to the earlier review comments
explicitly, and I also should not have sent so many separate patches.

I will group future patches by subsystem and make sure to respond
clearly to review feedback before resending.

Thanks for pointing this out.

Best regards,
Guangshuo