linux-kernel - Re: [RFC Patch v1 1/6] acpi_pad: simplify notify handler by using acpi_drv

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <530444F7.4060108@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Wed, 19 Feb 2014 13:45:27 +0800
From:	Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
To:	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>
CC:	"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
	Lv Zheng <lv.zheng@...el.com>, Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch v1 1/6] acpi_pad: simplify notify handler by using
 acpi_drv_ops->notify

Thanks, Rafael. I will drop this patch then.

On 2014/2/18 9:06, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Monday, February 17, 2014 01:02:48 PM Jiang Liu wrote:
>> Use callback acpi_drv_ops->notify to simplify acpi_pad driver's
>> notification handling code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@...ux.intel.com>
> 
> There is a plan to move away from using struct acpi_driver objects and
> this change will need to be reverted then.  I'm not sure if that's really
> useful?
> 
>> ---
>>  drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c |   25 +++++--------------------
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
>> index df96a0f..1e3ce76 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/acpi_pad.c
>> @@ -443,14 +443,11 @@ static void acpi_pad_handle_notify(acpi_handle handle)
>>  	mutex_unlock(&isolated_cpus_lock);
>>  }
>>  
>> -static void acpi_pad_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event,
>> -	void *data)
>> +static void acpi_pad_notify(struct acpi_device *device, u32 event)
>>  {
>> -	struct acpi_device *device = data;
>> -
>>  	switch (event) {
>>  	case ACPI_PROCESSOR_AGGREGATOR_NOTIFY:
>> -		acpi_pad_handle_notify(handle);
>> +		acpi_pad_handle_notify(device->handle);
>>  		acpi_bus_generate_netlink_event(device->pnp.device_class,
>>  			dev_name(&device->dev), event, 0);
>>  		break;
>> @@ -462,22 +459,10 @@ static void acpi_pad_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event,
>>  
>>  static int acpi_pad_add(struct acpi_device *device)
>>  {
>> -	acpi_status status;
>> -
>>  	strcpy(acpi_device_name(device), ACPI_PROCESSOR_AGGREGATOR_DEVICE_NAME);
>>  	strcpy(acpi_device_class(device), ACPI_PROCESSOR_AGGREGATOR_CLASS);
>>  
>> -	if (acpi_pad_add_sysfs(device))
>> -		return -ENODEV;
>> -
>> -	status = acpi_install_notify_handler(device->handle,
>> -		ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, acpi_pad_notify, device);
>> -	if (ACPI_FAILURE(status)) {
>> -		acpi_pad_remove_sysfs(device);
>> -		return -ENODEV;
>> -	}
>> -
>> -	return 0;
>> +	return acpi_pad_add_sysfs(device);
>>  }
>>  
>>  static int acpi_pad_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
>> @@ -486,9 +471,8 @@ static int acpi_pad_remove(struct acpi_device *device)
>>  	acpi_pad_idle_cpus(0);
>>  	mutex_unlock(&isolated_cpus_lock);
>>  
>> -	acpi_remove_notify_handler(device->handle,
>> -		ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY, acpi_pad_notify);
>>  	acpi_pad_remove_sysfs(device);
>> +
>>  	return 0;
>>  }
>>  
>> @@ -505,6 +489,7 @@ static struct acpi_driver acpi_pad_driver = {
>>  	.ops = {
>>  		.add = acpi_pad_add,
>>  		.remove = acpi_pad_remove,
>> +		.notify = acpi_pad_notify,
>>  	},
>>  };
>>  
>>
> 
--
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/