[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3690707.5664qBQcL8@vostro.rjw.lan>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 01:11:25 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de>,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
Jean Delvare <khali@...ux-fr.org>, linux-i2c@...r.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PULL REQUEST] i2c for 3.13
On Monday, November 18, 2013 03:46:34 PM Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Wolfram Sang <wsa@...-dreams.de> wrote:
> >
> > here is the pull request from the i2c subsystem for 3.13:
>
> So while resolving some fairly trivial conflicts here, I noticed that
> commit a76e9bd89ae7 ("i2c: attach/detach I2C client device to the ACPI
> power domain") that I got earlier through the ACPI/PM tree calls
> acpi_dev_pm_detach() even when the device "->remove()" function fails.
> But it only sets clientdata to NULL if it succeeds.
>
> That looks a bit odd.
>
> I didn't try to fix it, though. I just thought I'd point out the oddity.
Well, given that the driver core doesn't even check the return value of
dev->bus->remove(dev), I think doing the unconditional acpi_dev_pm_detach()
is actually correct and clientdata should be cleared unconditionally too.
Rafael
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists