[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <716362db-7355-7f10-6b8b-ee59ad22db41@metux.net>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 11:23:10 +0200
From: "Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult" <lkml@...ux.net>
To: Lizhe <sensor1010@....com>, linus.walleij@...aro.org,
brgl@...ev.pl, geert+renesas@...der.be, info@...ux.net,
rjui@...adcom.com, bcm-kernel-feedback-list@...adcom.com,
f.fainelli@...il.com, sbranden@...adcom.com, shc_work@...l.ru,
j-keerthy@...com, hoan@...amperecomputing.com,
fancer.lancer@...il.com, orsonzhai@...il.com,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, zhang.lyra@...il.com,
shawnguo@...nel.org, s.hauer@...gutronix.de, kernel@...gutronix.de,
festevam@...il.com, linux-imx@....com, kaloz@...nwrt.org,
khalasa@...p.pl, keguang.zhang@...il.com, daniel@...ngy.jp,
romain.perier@...il.com, matthias.bgg@...il.com,
angelogioacchino.delregno@...labora.com, thierry.reding@...il.com,
u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de, grygorii.strashko@...com,
ssantosh@...nel.org, khilman@...nel.org, mani@...nel.org,
ludovic.desroches@...rochip.com, andy@...nel.org,
palmer@...belt.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com, jonathanh@...dia.com,
sathyanarayanan.kuppuswamy@...ux.intel.com, michal.simek@...inx.com
Cc: linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-mips@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org, linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-omap@...r.kernel.org, linux-unisoc@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-tegra@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] drivers/gpio : Remove redundant
platform_set_drvdata().
On 19.03.23 12:59, Lizhe wrote:
Hi,
> platform_set_drvdata() is redundant in these functions.
> the purpose of calling this function is to place data
> in *driver_data. but the data is not retrieved in these
> functions
I appreciate your contribution, but I have to NAK for the gpio-amd-fch
driver: it would at least create a memleak (driver core can't free the
driver_data when the driver is unloaded).
In general, patches to drivers should be splitted per driver, unless
there's a hard reason to do otherwise. That's important for the
individual maintainers being able to review patches to their drivers.
If each maintainer can only ack on pieces of the patch, somebody else
would need to split out those things that could be picked. Really too
complicated.
--mtx
--
---
Hinweis: unverschlüsselte E-Mails können leicht abgehört und manipuliert
werden ! Für eine vertrauliche Kommunikation senden Sie bitte ihren
GPG/PGP-Schlüssel zu.
---
Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult
Free software and Linux embedded engineering
info@...ux.net -- +49-151-27565287
Powered by blists - more mailing lists