All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Richard MUSIL <richard.musil@st.com>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
	Marcel Selhorst <tpm@selhorst.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) - repost
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 22:37:46 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071119223746.5f0e938f.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <46F909CA.3030101@st.com>

On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 15:14:50 +0200 Richard MUSIL <richard.musil@st.com> wrote:

> Hello all,
> 
> sometime ago I submitted patch to TPM layer, originally I thought this
> patch could be accepted into kernel (see below). However,
> since this did not happen, I wonder, if there are some problems with the
> patch or whether I am expected to do/provide something else, in order to
> have it accepted.
> 
> The patch follows even more below.
> 

Thanks.  We prefer that contributors sign off their work as per
Documentation/SubmittingPatches.  Please review that and if agrereable,
send a Signed-off-by: for this work.

>  /*
> + * Once all references to platform device are down to 0,
> + * release all allocated structures.
> + * In case vendor provided release function,
> + * call it too.
> + */
> +static void tpm_dev_release(struct device *dev)
> +{
> +	struct tpm_chip *chip = dev_get_drvdata(dev);
> +	/* call vendor release, if defined */

That's not the most useful of comments ;)

> +	if (chip->vendor.release)
> +		chip->vendor.release(dev);
> +
> +	/* it *should* be: chip->release != NULL */

And that one's actually wrong in the context of kernel coding practices. 
But whatever.

> +	if (likely(chip->release))
> +		chip->release(dev);

>From my reading, neither of these fields can ever be NULL, so the tests
simply aren't needed?

> +	clear_bit(chip->dev_num, dev_mask);
> +	kfree(chip->vendor.miscdev.name);
> +	kfree(chip);
> +}
> +
> +/*
>   * Called from tpm_<specific>.c probe function only for devices 
>   * the driver has determined it should claim.  Prior to calling
>   * this function the specific probe function has called pci_enable_device
> @@ -1136,23 +1153,21 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_register_hardware(struct device *dev, const struct tpm_vend
>  
>  	chip->vendor.miscdev.parent = dev;
>  	chip->dev = get_device(dev);
> +	chip->release = dev->release;
> +	dev->release = tpm_dev_release;
> +	dev_set_drvdata(dev, chip);
>  
>  	if (misc_register(&chip->vendor.miscdev)) {
>  		dev_err(chip->dev,
>  			"unable to misc_register %s, minor %d\n",
>  			chip->vendor.miscdev.name,
>  			chip->vendor.miscdev.minor);
> -		put_device(dev);
> -		clear_bit(chip->dev_num, dev_mask);
> -		kfree(chip);
> -		kfree(devname);
> +		put_device(chip->dev);
>  		return NULL;
>  	}
>  
>  	spin_lock(&driver_lock);
>  
> -	dev_set_drvdata(dev, chip);
> -
>  	list_add(&chip->list, &tpm_chip_list);
>  
>  	spin_unlock(&driver_lock);
> @@ -1160,10 +1175,7 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_register_hardware(struct device *dev, const struct tpm_vend
>  	if (sysfs_create_group(&dev->kobj, chip->vendor.attr_group)) {
>  		list_del(&chip->list);
>  		misc_deregister(&chip->vendor.miscdev);
> -		put_device(dev);
> -		clear_bit(chip->dev_num, dev_mask);
> -		kfree(chip);
> -		kfree(devname);
> +		put_device(chip->dev);
>  		return NULL;
>  	}
>  
> diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> index b2e2b00..f1c265e 100644
> --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ struct tpm_vendor_specific {
>  	int (*send) (struct tpm_chip *, u8 *, size_t);
>  	void (*cancel) (struct tpm_chip *);
>  	u8 (*status) (struct tpm_chip *);
> +	void (*release) (struct device *);
>  	struct miscdevice miscdev;
>  	struct attribute_group *attr_group;
>  	struct list_head list;
> @@ -106,6 +107,7 @@ struct tpm_chip {
>  	struct dentry **bios_dir;
>  
>  	struct list_head list;
> +	void (*release) (struct device *);
>  };
>  
>  #define to_tpm_chip(n) container_of(n, struct tpm_chip, vendor)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-11-20  6:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-08-23  8:46 [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) Richard MUSIL
2007-08-23  9:26 ` Greg KH
2007-09-25 13:14   ` [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) - repost Richard MUSIL
2007-09-25 14:11     ` Greg KH
2007-09-28  8:08       ` [tpmdd-devel] " Marcel Selhorst
2007-11-20  6:37     ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2007-11-20 12:32       ` [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) - 2nd repost Richard MUSIL
2007-11-20 12:53         ` Richard MUSIL
2007-11-20 20:06         ` Andrew Morton
2007-11-18 23:13 ` [tpmdd-devel] [PATCH] - TPM device driver layer (tpm.c|h) Marcel Selhorst
2007-11-19  5:09   ` Greg KH
2007-11-19  6:42     ` Marcel Selhorst

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20071119223746.5f0e938f.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=greg@kroah.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=richard.musil@st.com \
    --cc=tpm@selhorst.net \
    --cc=tpmdd-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.