Re: [PATCH 3/5] thermal/core: Remove unneeded mutex_destroy()

[Rafael J. Wysocki]

On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 10:30 AM Daniel Lezcano
<daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 19/01/2023 08:41, Zhang, Rui wrote:
> > On Wed, 2023-01-18 at 22:11 +0100, Daniel Lezcano wrote:
> >> If the thermal framework fails to initialize, the mutex can be used
> >> by
> >> the different functions registering a thermal zone anyway.
> >
> > Hmm, even with no governors and unregistered thermal sysfs class?
> >
> > IMO, thermal APIs for registering a thermal_zone/cooling_device should
> > yield early if thermal_init fails.
> > For other APIs that relies on a valid
> > thermal_zone_device/thermal_cooling_device pointer, nothing needs to
> > be changed.
> >
> > what do you think?
>
> I think you are right.
>
> It would be nice if we can check if the thermal class is registered and
> bail out if not. But there is no function to check that AFAICS.
>
> Alternatively we can convert the thermal class static structure to a
> pointer and set it to NULL in case of error in thermal_init() ?

It doesn't matter if this is a NULL pointer or a static object that's
clearly marked as unused.