[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <869a8ad9-dd2f-8462-c0c4-2d8a62d74185@siemens.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2018 09:28:47 +0200
From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
To: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] PCI: Introduce devm_of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources
On 2018-04-28 00:24, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2018 at 05:13:39PM +0200, Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@...mens.com>
>>
>> of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources allocates the resource structures it
>> fills dynamically, but none of its callers care to release them so far.
>> Rather than requiring everyone to do this explicitly, introduce a
>> managed version of that service. This differs API-wise only in taking a
>> reference to the associated device, rather than to the device tree node.
>>
>> As of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources is an exported interface, we cannot
>> simply drop it at this point. After converting all in-tree users to the
>> new API, we could phase out the unmanaged one over some grace period.
>
> It looks like it might be possible to split this into three or four
> patches:
>
> 1) Factor __of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() out of
> of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()
>
> 2) Add struct device * argument
>
> 3) Convert pr_info() to dev_info()
>
> 4) Add devm_of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources()
Will do. I'm even considering
5) mark of_pci_get_host_bridge_resources() __deprecated, due to the leak
and no remaining in-tree user - what do you think?
Jan
--
Siemens AG, Corporate Technology, CT RDA IOT SES-DE
Corporate Competence Center Embedded Linux
Powered by blists - more mailing lists