Hello Peeps! Few months ago I sent question below to clk mailing list. I got zero replies so I took that as a hint that I am mistaken =) Hence I resend same question to this list - perhaps this is a better place to search for answer to (simple) question like this. ----- Forwarded message from Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com> -----
Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2018 13:19:40 +0300 From: Matti Vaittinen <matti.vaittinen@fi.rohmeurope.com> To: zyw@rock-chips.com, mturquette@baylibre.com, sboyd@kernel.org, w.egorov@phytec.de Cc: linux-clk@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Does Rockchip RK808 driver unload work as intended? User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Hi dee Ho peeps,
I was browsing through the clk drivers as I tried to do some cleaning. Few days ago I submitted a patch which would add devm variants for clkdev lookup registration. I also added devm of_provider registration for cases where it is actually the parent device which contains clock definitions in DT. This seems to be quite typical for MFDs.
While doing this I hit to Rockchip RK808 driver which seems to utilize oarent device (MFD dev) for pretty much all devm releasing. I wonder if this is safe? What happens if one tries to remove the RK808 clk module?
I guess the clk deregistration and cleanups are not ran as parent device stays there, right? But is the clk module and clk module code still unload? So won't clk operation pointers registered to clk core become invalid?
I guess I don't have any HW to test this mnyself. And as the driver has been there since 2014 - well, chances are the driver does work and I just don't get it =)
So can someone please shed some light on this? Is this a bug or am I just plain wrong?
Br, Matti Vaittinen
----- End forwarded message ----- -- Matti Vaittinen ROHM Semiconductors ~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then, he vanished ~~~