linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAMpxmJW=HWf_NxGpfBkX=utgOTs4+6RtypxnKGtpuYnX=t8rGQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 13 Apr 2021 12:43:48 +0200
From:   Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
Cc:     Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@...inx.com>,
        "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        "michal.simek@...inx.com" <michal.simek@...inx.com>,
        "shubhrajyoti.datta@...inx.com" <shubhrajyoti.datta@...inx.com>,
        "sgoud@...inx.com" <sgoud@...inx.com>,
        "linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org" <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "git@...inx.com" <git@...inx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform_driver to simplify
 the code

On Sat, Apr 10, 2021 at 12:08 AM Andy Shevchenko
<andy.shevchenko@...il.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Friday, April 9, 2021, Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@...inx.com> wrote:
>>
>> module_platform_driver() makes the code simpler by eliminating
>> boilerplate code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Srinivas Neeli <srinivas.neeli@...inx.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c | 17 +----------------
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 16 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> index 3521c1dc3ac0..bb1ac0c5cf26 100644
>> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-zynq.c
>> @@ -1020,22 +1020,7 @@ static struct platform_driver zynq_gpio_driver = {
>>         .remove = zynq_gpio_remove,
>>  };
>>
>> -/**
>> - * zynq_gpio_init - Initial driver registration call
>> - *
>> - * Return: value from platform_driver_register
>> - */
>> -static int __init zynq_gpio_init(void)
>> -{
>> -       return platform_driver_register(&zynq_gpio_driver);
>> -}
>> -postcore_initcall(zynq_gpio_init);
>
>
>
> It’s not an equivalent. Have you tested on actual hardware? If no, there is no go for this change.
>

Yep, this has been like this since the initial introduction of this
driver. Unfortunately there's no documented reason so unless we can
test it, it has to stay this way.

Bartosz