[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200907115051.GY1891694@smile.fi.intel.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Sep 2020 14:50:51 +0300
From: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
To: Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>
Cc: Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Mika Westerberg <mika.westerberg@...ux.intel.com>,
Kent Gibson <warthog618@...il.com>,
"open list:GPIO SUBSYSTEM" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-doc <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org,
Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/23] gpio: mockup: use dynamic device IDs
On Mon, Sep 07, 2020 at 01:04:29PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2020 at 6:49 PM Andy Shevchenko
> <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 04, 2020 at 05:45:39PM +0200, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> > >
> > > We're currently creating chips at module init time only so using a
> > > static index for dummy devices is fine. We want to support dynamically
> > > created chips however so we need to switch to dynamic device IDs.
> >
> > It misses ida_destroy().
>
> No, we always call ida_free() for separate IDs when removing devices
> and we remove all devices at module exit so no need to call
> ida_destroy().
Perhaps couple of words about this in the commit message?
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
Powered by blists - more mailing lists