linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] pinctrl: sunxi: Prepare for building SoC specific drivers as modules

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: <5559B1AF.2010200@gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 18 May 2015 11:32:31 +0200
From:	Jens Kuske <jenskuske@...il.com>
To:	Maxime Ripard <maxime.ripard@...e-electrons.com>
CC:	Emilio López <emilio@...pez.com.ar>,
	Mike Turquette <mturquette@...aro.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
	Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@...e.org>,
	Vishnu Patekar <vishnupatekar0510@...il.com>,
	Hans de Goede <hdegoede@...hat.com>,
	devicetree@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sunxi@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 04/10] pinctrl: sunxi: Prepare for building SoC specific
 drivers as modules

Hi,

On 05/17/15 16:19, Maxime Ripard wrote:
> On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 06:38:54PM +0200, Jens Kuske wrote:
>> Add a remove function and export the init and remove function
>> to allow us to build the SoC specific drivers as modules.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jens Kuske <jenskuske@...il.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++------
>>  drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.h |  2 ++
>>  2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c
>> index f8e171b..4ef6b3d 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/sunxi/pinctrl-sunxi.c
>> @@ -856,7 +856,6 @@ int sunxi_pinctrl_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>  	struct sunxi_pinctrl *pctl;
>>  	struct resource *res;
>>  	int i, ret, last_pin;
>> -	struct clk *clk;
>>  
>>  	pctl = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*pctl), GFP_KERNEL);
>>  	if (!pctl)
>> @@ -954,13 +953,13 @@ int sunxi_pinctrl_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>  			goto gpiochip_error;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>> -	if (IS_ERR(clk)) {
>> -		ret = PTR_ERR(clk);
>> +	pctl->clk = devm_clk_get(&pdev->dev, NULL);
>> +	if (IS_ERR(pctl->clk)) {
>> +		ret = PTR_ERR(pctl->clk);
>>  		goto gpiochip_error;
>>  	}
>>  
>> -	ret = clk_prepare_enable(clk);
>> +	ret = clk_prepare_enable(pctl->clk);
>>  	if (ret)
>>  		goto gpiochip_error;
>>  
>> @@ -1015,10 +1014,24 @@ int sunxi_pinctrl_init(struct platform_device *pdev,
>>  	return 0;
>>  
>>  clk_error:
>> -	clk_disable_unprepare(clk);
>> +	clk_disable_unprepare(pctl->clk);
>>  gpiochip_error:
>>  	gpiochip_remove(pctl->chip);
>>  pinctrl_error:
>>  	pinctrl_unregister(pctl->pctl_dev);
>>  	return ret;
>>  }
>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(sunxi_pinctrl_init);
>> +
>> +int sunxi_pinctrl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
>> +	struct sunxi_pinctrl *pctl = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> +
>> +	gpiochip_remove(pctl->chip);
>> +	pinctrl_unregister(pctl->pctl_dev);
>> +
>> +	clk_disable_unprepare(pctl->clk);
> 
> We should also remove the domain and the interrupt mapping here.

Ouch, I missed that. Only looked at the *_error: labels.

Apart from that, currently the kernel panics some seconds after removing
the pinctrl module because mmc wants to access a gpio. Can this be
prevented somehow? I think pinctrl must not be removed once other
devices use any pin-related things.

Jens
--
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/