[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56CDE50C.4050504@nvidia.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 22:44:52 +0530
From: Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com>
To: Stefan Wahren <stefan.wahren@...e.com>, <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
<lee@...nel.org>, <corbet@....net>
CC: <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com>,
<linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
<linux-rpi-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
Shawn Guo <shawnguo@...nel.org>,
Sascha Hauer <kernel@...gutronix.de>,
Fabio Estevam <fabio.estevam@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/50] pinctrl: Add and use devm_ apis for pinctrl_{register,
unregister}
On Wednesday 24 February 2016 10:52 PM, Stefan Wahren wrote:
> Hi Laxman,
>
>> Laxman Dewangan <ldewangan@...dia.com> hat am 24. Februar 2016 um 14:15
>> geschrieben:
>>
>>
>> Add resource manageemnt APIs fro pinctrl_register() and pinctrl_unregister()
>> and use these new APIs on hw driver to reduce the error path code and
>> remove callback for driver.
>>
> just for interest: why didn't you patch freescale/pinctrl-mxs.c?
>
The remove callback is implemented as:
int mxs_pinctrl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
struct mxs_pinctrl_data *d = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
pinctrl_unregister(d->pctl);
iounmap(d->base);
return 0;
}
So if I use devm_pinctrl_register() then the sequence will be different like
iounmap()
pinctrl_unregister()
And I did not want to change the sequence as dont know the side effect
until I test it on actual platform which is not there with me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists