| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAGTfZH0Qwpup_wiyLjFg0EjeiK7UjMDMR3TUhB+uT86+sZboSg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2014 22:36:19 +0900
From: Chanwoo Choi <cwchoi00@...il.com>
To: Sangjung <sangjung.woo@...sung.com>
Cc: MyungJoo Ham <myungjoo.ham@...sung.com>,
Chanwoo Choi <cw00.choi@...sung.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <k.kozlowski@...sung.com>,
Seung-Woo Kim <sw0312.kim@...sung.com>, again4you@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 1/8] extcon: Add resource-managed extcon register function
Hi,
On Sat, Apr 19, 2014 at 6:50 PM, Sangjung <sangjung.woo@...sung.com> wrote:
> Hi Chanwoo.
>
> Thanks for your comments. I also add my opinion too.
>
>
>
> On 04/19/2014 04:13 PM, Chanwoo Choi wrote:
>>
>> Hi Sangjung,
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 9:32 AM, Sangjung Woo <sangjung.woo@...sung.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Add resource-managed extcon device register function for convenience.
>>> For example, if a extcon device is attached with new
>>> devm_extcon_dev_register(), that extcon device is automatically
>>> unregistered on driver detach.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Sangjung Woo <sangjung.woo@...sung.com>
>>> ---
>>> drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c | 72
>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>> include/linux/extcon.h | 17 ++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>>> b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>>> index 7ab21aa..e177edb6 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/extcon/extcon-class.c
>>> @@ -819,6 +819,78 @@ void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev *edev)
>>> }
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(extcon_dev_unregister);
>>>
>>> +
>>> +/*
>>> + * Device resource management
>>> + */
>>
>> This comment is un-necessary because this patchset(v3) remove 'struct
>> extcon_devres'.
>>
>>> +static void devm_extcon_dev_release(struct device *dev, void *res)
>>> +{
>>> + struct extcon_dev *devres = res;
>>> +
>>> + extcon_dev_unregister(devres);
>>
>> I prefer following function call withou defining separate 'devres'
>> variable.
>> But, this casting on the first argument is only for readability.
>> extcon_dev_unregister((strcut extcon_dev *)res);
>>
> OK. I'll fix it.
>
>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int devm_extcon_dev_match(struct device *dev, void *res, void
>>> *data)
>>> +{
>>> + struct extcon_dev *devres = res;
>>> + struct extcon_dev *match = data;
>>> + return devres == match;
>>
>> To simplify code, I think you could change checking code as following:
>> return res == data;
>
> Right. Simple is better than others.
>
>
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> + * devm_extcon_dev_register() - Resource-managed extcon_dev_register()
>>> + * @dev: device to allocate extcon device
>>> + * @edev: the new extcon device to register
>>> + *
>>> + * Managed extcon_dev_register() function. If extcon device is attached
>>> with
>>> + * this function, that extcon device is automatically unregistered on
>>> driver
>>> + * detach. Internally this function calls extcon_dev_register()
>>> function.
>>> + * To get more information, refer that function.
>>> + *
>>> + * If extcon device is registered with this function and the device
>>> needs to be
>>> + * unregistered separately, devm_extcon_dev_unregister() should be used.
>>> + *
>>> + * RETURNS:
>>> + * 0 on success, negative error number on failure.
>>> + */
>>> +int devm_extcon_dev_register(struct device *dev, struct extcon_dev
>>> *edev)
>>> +{
>>> + struct extcon_dev *devres;
>>
>> The 'devres' in this function don't mean 'device resource structure'.
>> So I think it is not proper name.
>> I think you should use other general name (e.g., 'ptr' or 'res'
>> instead of 'devres')
>>
>>> + int ret;
>>> +
>>> + devres = devres_alloc(devm_extcon_dev_release, sizeof(*devres)
>>
>> Other subsytem used double pointer to get device resource from
>> devres_alloc() instead of
>> single pointer.(devres is single pointer) I can't find subsystem
>> using single pointer of devm function.
>> First of all, We have to analyze the correct reason using only double
>> pointer instead of single pointer whether single pointer use is good
>> or not.
>
>
> IMO, other subsystem should return the memory pointer that is allocated by
> devres_alloc().
> However, in our case, we need not do that since the pointer is used only in
> extcon core.
> You can refer the way that I did to gpio subsystem (devm_gpio_request() in
> /drivers/gpio/devres.c).
As you comment, I checked 'devm_gpio_request' in drivers/gpio/devres.c
. There are a little difference between devm_extcon_dev_register and
devm_gpio_request.
The second argument (unsigned gpio) is not pointer type in
devm_gpio_request() But, devm_extcon_dev_register() needs the pointer
type for second argument(struct extcon_dev *edev).
>
>
>>> + GFP_KERNEL);
>>> + if (!devres)
>>> + return -ENOMEM;
>>> +
>>> + ret = extcon_dev_register(edev);
>>> + if (ret) {
>>> + devres_free(devres);
>>> + return ret;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + devres = edev;
>>> + devres_add(dev, devres);
>>> +
>>> + return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_extcon_dev_register);
>>> +
>>> +/**
>>> + * devm_extcon_dev_unregister() - Resource-managed
>>> extcon_dev_unregister()
>>> + * @dev: device the extcon belongs to
>>> + * @edev: the extcon device to unregister
>>> + *
>>> + * Unregister extcon device that is registered with
>>> devm_extcon_dev_register()
>>> + * function.
>>> + */
>>> +void devm_extcon_dev_unregister(struct device *dev, struct extcon_dev
>>> *edev)
>>> +{
>>> + WARN_ON(devres_release(dev, devm_extcon_dev_release,
>>> + devm_extcon_dev_match, edev));
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(devm_extcon_dev_unregister);
>>> +
>>> #ifdef CONFIG_OF
>>> /*
>>> * extcon_get_edev_by_phandle - Get the extcon device from devicetree
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/extcon.h b/include/linux/extcon.h
>>> index f488145..35f3343 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/extcon.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/extcon.h
>>> @@ -188,6 +188,14 @@ extern void extcon_dev_unregister(struct extcon_dev
>>> *edev);
>>> extern struct extcon_dev *extcon_get_extcon_dev(const char
>>> *extcon_name);
>>>
>>> /*
>>> + * Resource-managed extcon device register function.
>>> + */
>>> +extern int devm_extcon_dev_register(struct device *dev,
>>> + struct extcon_dev *edev);
>>> +extern void devm_extcon_dev_unregister(struct device *dev,
>>> + struct extcon_dev *edev);
>>
>> I prefer that this function meet indentation of function definition
>> needs as following:
>>
>> extern int devm_extcon_dev_register(struct device *dev,
>>
>> struct extcon_dev *edev);
>> extern void devm_extcon_dev_unregister(struct device *dev,
>>
>> struct extcon_dev *edev);
>
>
> I have a question about the indentation issue
> since my Thunderbird email client does not show me the below line tidy.
>
> You want me to adjust the start point of the second line
> to the right after parentheses of the first line. right?
Right.
Thanks,
Chanwoo Choi
--
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