linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] PCI: dw-rockchip: Add remove callback for resource cleanup

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Message-ID: <15087240.uLZWGnKmhe@workhorse>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2025 13:29:25 +0100
From: Nicolas Frattaroli <nicolas.frattaroli@...labora.com>
To: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>,
 Manivannan Sadhasivam <mani@...nel.org>
Cc: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@...nel.org>,
 Krzysztof Wilczyński <kwilczynski@...nel.org>,
 Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>, Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
 Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>, Niklas Cassel <cassel@...nel.org>,
 Shawn Lin <shawn.lin@...k-chips.com>, Hans Zhang <18255117159@....com>,
 "open list:PCI NATIVE HOST BRIDGE AND ENDPOINT DRIVERS"
 <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
 "moderated list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support"
 <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
 "open list:ARM/Rockchip SoC support" <linux-rockchip@...ts.infradead.org>,
 open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject:
 Re: [PATCH v1 1/2] PCI: dw-rockchip: Add remove callback for resource cleanup

On Friday, 31 October 2025 09:36:05 Central European Standard Time Manivannan Sadhasivam wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 27, 2025 at 08:25:29PM +0530, Anand Moon wrote:
> > Introduce a .remove() callback to the Rockchip DesignWare PCIe
> > controller driver to ensure proper resource deinitialization during
> > device removal. This includes disabling clocks and deinitializing the
> > PCIe PHY.
> > 
> 
> How can you remove a driver that is only built-in? You are just sending some
> pointless patches that were not tested and does not make sense at all.

The better question would be: why does Kconfig make PCIE_ROCKCHIP_DW
a bool rather than a tristate? I see other PCIE_DW drivers using
tristate, so this doesn't seem like a technical limitation with the
IP.

> 
> Please stop wasting others time.
> 
> - Mani
> 
> > Signed-off-by: Anand Moon <linux.amoon@...il.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c | 11 +++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > index 87dd2dd188b4..b878ae8e2b3e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pci/controller/dwc/pcie-dw-rockchip.c
> > @@ -717,6 +717,16 @@ static int rockchip_pcie_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void rockchip_pcie_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> > +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > +	struct rockchip_pcie *rockchip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> > +
> > +	/* Perform other cleanups as necessary */
> > +	clk_bulk_disable_unprepare(rockchip->clk_cnt, rockchip->clks);
> > +	rockchip_pcie_phy_deinit(rockchip);
> > +}
> > +
> >  static const struct rockchip_pcie_of_data rockchip_pcie_rc_of_data_rk3568 = {
> >  	.mode = DW_PCIE_RC_TYPE,
> >  };
> > @@ -754,5 +764,6 @@ static struct platform_driver rockchip_pcie_driver = {
> >  		.suppress_bind_attrs = true,
> >  	},
> >  	.probe = rockchip_pcie_probe,
> > +	.remove = rockchip_pcie_remove,
> >  };
> >  builtin_platform_driver(rockchip_pcie_driver);
> 
>