[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bc33c01db5b048899dce5467e7efec74@realtek.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Nov 2023 06:27:16 +0000
From: Stanley Chang[昌育德]
<stanley_chang@...ltek.com>
To: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>
CC: "Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com" <Thinh.Nguyen@...opsys.com>,
"conor+dt@...nel.org" <conor+dt@...nel.org>,
"devicetree@...r.kernel.org" <devicetree@...r.kernel.org>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org"
<krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-usb@...r.kernel.org" <linux-usb@...r.kernel.org>,
"robh+dt@...nel.org" <robh+dt@...nel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 1/2] usb: dwc3: add Realtek DHC RTD SoC dwc3 glue layer driver
Hi CJ,
I think these functions are not needed in remove function.
In dwc3_rtk_probe_dwc3_core,
I have used
dwc3_node = of_get_compatible_child(node, "snps,dwc3");
and
dwc3_pdev = of_find_device_by_node(dwc3_node);
So, I call these put functions.
platform_device_put(dwc3_pdev);
of_node_put(dwc3_node);
Thanks,
Stanley
> Hi,
>
> Is something like
> platform_device_put(dwc3_pdev);
> of_node_put(dwc3_node);
> needed in the remove function?
>
> (as done in the error handling path of dwc3_rtk_probe_dwc3_core())
>
> Or should it be added at the end of dwc3_rtk_probe_dwc3_core() if the
> reference are nor needed anymore when we leave the function?
>
> CJ
>
> > + of_platform_depopulate(rtk->dev); }
> > +
>
> ...
Powered by blists - more mailing lists