linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH V3] ACPI / GED: unregister interrupts during shutdown

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]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0gnoZZhpCa4ttyEyVA6vKKSiCrQx8bVVKWWH_+O1uYTLA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 9 Dec 2017 15:12:23 +0100
From:   "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To:     Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org>
Cc:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        Timur Tabi <timur@...eaurora.org>,
        linux-arm-msm <linux-arm-msm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] ACPI / GED: unregister interrupts during shutdown

On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@...eaurora.org> wrote:
> On 12/8/2017 8:54 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> static int ged_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> +       struct acpi_ged_device *geddev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>>
>>> +       ged_cleanup_irq(geddev);
>> Do you really need this duplication?  You may as well call
>> ged_shutdown() from here.
>>
>> And the local variable is redundant too.
>>
>> I guess it would be better to just fold ged_cleanup_irq() into
>> ged_shutdown() and call that from ged_remove().
>>
>
> I originally tried to make these two APIs as common as possible and tried
> calling shutdown from remove. However, the calling convention of shutdown
> and remove are different.

Look at the code in your patch: ged_shutdown() does exactly the same
things as ged_remove(), except that ged_remove() returns 0 in addition
to that, so you can do it this way:

static int int ged_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
       ged_shutdown(pdev);
       return 0;
}

Why wouldn't that work?

> Shutdown returns void; whereas, remove returns an integer. That's why, I
> created a common function and called from both places.
>
> I can probably make the calling parameter of ged_cleanup_irq() a pdev and
> get rid of the additional casting in these two different functions.
>
> Let me know if you have a better idea.

And with the above, you can fold your ged_cleanup_irq() into
ged_shutdown(), can't you?