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

Date:   Wed, 14 Apr 2021 14:45:55 +0000
From:   Srinivas Neeli <sneeli@...inx.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
CC:     "linus.walleij@...aro.org" <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Michal Simek <michals@...inx.com>,
        Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@...inx.com>,
        Srinivas Goud <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 <git@...inx.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 1/3] gpio: zynq: use module_platform_driver to simplify
 the code

HI baratosz and Andy,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, April 13, 2021 4:14 PM
> To: Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@...il.com>
> Cc: Srinivas Neeli <sneeli@...inx.com>; linus.walleij@...aro.org; Michal Simek
> <michals@...inx.com>; Shubhrajyoti Datta <shubhraj@...inx.com>; Srinivas
> Goud <sgoud@...inx.com>; linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org; linux-arm-
> kernel@...ts.infradead.org; linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; git
> <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.
> 
I tested driver, functionality wise everything working fine.
Based on below conversation, I moved driver to module driver.
https://lore.kernel.org/patchwork/patch/818202/

Thanks
Srinivas Neeli

> Bartosz