[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <540940B0.5090000@smartplayin.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 10:18:48 +0530
From: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>
To: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
kernel@...inux.com
CC: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...il.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@...aro.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@...com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@...com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@...ymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Add remove function and remove gpio_chip
on failure
Hi Srini,
Thanks for review.
On 04-09-2014 11:38 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Pramod,
> sorry for delay in reply as I was travelling, still in Jet lag.
>> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@...rtplayin.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> index 5475374..9296845 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static int st_gpiolib_register_bank(struct st_pinctrl *info,
>> 0, handle_simple_irq,
>> IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
>> if (err) {
>> + gpiochip_remove(&bank->gpio_chip);
> This change-set looks good.
> IMO, you can send a patch for this change set.
Will resend just this.
>
>> dev_info(dev, "could not add irqchip\n");
>> return err;
>> }
>> @@ -1685,6 +1686,29 @@ static int st_pctl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>
>> +static int st_pctl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
> Ideally this driver will not be removed, as other drivers depend on
> this, even the serial.
>
> so I see no big achievement in adding the remove functionality, as this
> is going to be a dead code and would never be tested.
>
>> + struct st_pinctrl *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
>> + struct device_node *child;
>> + struct gpio_chip gpio_chip;
>> + int bank = 0;
>> +
>
>> + if (info->nbanks) {
>> + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
>> + if (of_property_read_bool(child, "gpio-controller")) {
> We should not re-parse the DT nodes once we are done with it in the probe.
Thanks. :)
>
>> + gpio_chip = info->banks[bank].gpio_chip;
>> + gpiochip_remove(&gpio_chip);
>> + bank++;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>
> I think the logic is very simple:
>
> while (nbanks--)
> gpiochip_remove(&info->banks[bank++].gpio_chip))
Thanks again. Remove is not needed hence will not do this. But good know.
>
>
> thanks,
> srini
>> + pinctrl_unregister(info->pctl);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .driver = {
>> .name = "st-pinctrl",
>> @@ -1692,6 +1716,7 @@ static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .of_match_table = st_pctl_of_match,
>> },
>> .probe = st_pctl_probe,
>> + .remove = st_pctl_remove,
>> };
>>
>> static int __init st_pctl_init(void)
>>
> --
> 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/
>
--
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