linux-kernel - [PATCH 3/3] regulator: core: Use class device list for regulator

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 12 Aug 2015 13:20:43 +0100
From:	Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
To:	Liam Girdwood <lgirdwood@...il.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] regulator: core: Use class device list for regulator_list in late init

The regulator_list has exactly the same contents as the list that the
driver core maintains of regulator_class members so is redundant. As a
first step in converting over to use the class device list convert our
iteration in late_initcall() to use the class device iterator.

Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@...nel.org>
---
 drivers/regulator/core.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 51 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/regulator/core.c b/drivers/regulator/core.c
index 01a0a78..0bfbada 100644
--- a/drivers/regulator/core.c
+++ b/drivers/regulator/core.c
@@ -110,6 +110,11 @@ static struct regulator *create_regulator(struct regulator_dev *rdev,
 					  struct device *dev,
 					  const char *supply_name);
 
+static struct regulator_dev *dev_to_rdev(struct device *dev)
+{
+	return container_of(dev, struct regulator_dev, dev);
+}
+
 static const char *rdev_get_name(struct regulator_dev *rdev)
 {
 	if (rdev->constraints && rdev->constraints->name)
@@ -4152,13 +4157,57 @@ static int __init regulator_init(void)
 /* init early to allow our consumers to complete system booting */
 core_initcall(regulator_init);
 
-static int __init regulator_init_complete(void)
+static int regulator_late_cleanup(struct device *dev, void *data)
 {
-	struct regulator_dev *rdev;
-	const struct regulator_ops *ops;
-	struct regulation_constraints *c;
+	struct regulator_dev *rdev = dev_to_rdev(dev);
+	const struct regulator_ops *ops = rdev->desc->ops;
+	struct regulation_constraints *c = rdev->constraints;
 	int enabled, ret;
 
+	if (c && c->always_on)
+		return 0;
+
+	if (c && !(c->valid_ops_mask & REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS))
+		return 0;
+
+	mutex_lock(&rdev->mutex);
+
+	if (rdev->use_count)
+		goto unlock;
+
+	/* If we can't read the status assume it's on. */
+	if (ops->is_enabled)
+		enabled = ops->is_enabled(rdev);
+	else
+		enabled = 1;
+
+	if (!enabled)
+		goto unlock;
+
+	if (have_full_constraints()) {
+		/* We log since this may kill the system if it goes
+		 * wrong. */
+		rdev_info(rdev, "disabling\n");
+		ret = _regulator_do_disable(rdev);
+		if (ret != 0)
+			rdev_err(rdev, "couldn't disable: %d\n", ret);
+	} else {
+		/* The intention is that in future we will
+		 * assume that full constraints are provided
+		 * so warn even if we aren't going to do
+		 * anything here.
+		 */
+		rdev_warn(rdev, "incomplete constraints, leaving on\n");
+	}
+
+unlock:
+	mutex_unlock(&rdev->mutex);
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static int __init regulator_init_complete(void)
+{
 	/*
 	 * Since DT doesn't provide an idiomatic mechanism for
 	 * enabling full constraints and since it's much more natural
@@ -4168,58 +4217,13 @@ static int __init regulator_init_complete(void)
 	if (of_have_populated_dt())
 		has_full_constraints = true;
 
-	mutex_lock(&regulator_list_mutex);
-
 	/* If we have a full configuration then disable any regulators
 	 * we have permission to change the status for and which are
 	 * not in use or always_on.  This is effectively the default
 	 * for DT and ACPI as they have full constraints.
 	 */
-	list_for_each_entry(rdev, &regulator_list, list) {
-		ops = rdev->desc->ops;
-		c = rdev->constraints;
-
-		if (c && c->always_on)
-			continue;
-
-		if (c && !(c->valid_ops_mask & REGULATOR_CHANGE_STATUS))
-			continue;
-
-		mutex_lock(&rdev->mutex);
-
-		if (rdev->use_count)
-			goto unlock;
-
-		/* If we can't read the status assume it's on. */
-		if (ops->is_enabled)
-			enabled = ops->is_enabled(rdev);
-		else
-			enabled = 1;
-
-		if (!enabled)
-			goto unlock;
-
-		if (have_full_constraints()) {
-			/* We log since this may kill the system if it
-			 * goes wrong. */
-			rdev_info(rdev, "disabling\n");
-			ret = _regulator_do_disable(rdev);
-			if (ret != 0)
-				rdev_err(rdev, "couldn't disable: %d\n", ret);
-		} else {
-			/* The intention is that in future we will
-			 * assume that full constraints are provided
-			 * so warn even if we aren't going to do
-			 * anything here.
-			 */
-			rdev_warn(rdev, "incomplete constraints, leaving on\n");
-		}
-
-unlock:
-		mutex_unlock(&rdev->mutex);
-	}
-
-	mutex_unlock(&regulator_list_mutex);
+	class_for_each_device(&regulator_class, NULL, NULL,
+			      regulator_late_cleanup);
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.5.0

--
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/