From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: thierry.reding@avionic-design.de (Thierry Reding) Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:07:06 +0200 Subject: [PATCH 2/3] PWM: vt8500: Update vt8500 PWM driver support In-Reply-To: <201210221150.22004.arnd@arndb.de> References: <1350643135-13197-1-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz> <1350888712.3592.11.camel@gitbox> <20121022071118.GA30026@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> <201210221150.22004.arnd@arndb.de> Message-ID: <20121022120706.GA19467@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:50:21AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 22 October 2012, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 07:51:52PM +1300, Tony Prisk wrote: > > > Replies to your comments inline: > > > > > > On Mon, 2012-10-22 at 08:34 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > ... > > > > > -static int __devinit pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > > +static const struct of_device_id vt8500_pwm_dt_ids[] = { > > > > > + { .compatible = "via,vt8500-pwm", }, > > > > > + { /* Sentinel */ } > > > > > +}; > > > > > + > > > > > +static int __devinit vt8500_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > > > > > Since you're changing this line anyway, maybe you should drop __devinit > > > > (and __devexit for the .remove() callback). HOTPLUG is always enabled > > > > nowadays and will go away eventually, in which case these will need to > > > > be removed anyway. > > > > > > Will do. I must say the inconstancy among comments is rather > > > frustrating. In another patch I sent out a few days ago (completely > > > unrelated to this), I told to add __devexit to a remove() function :\ > > > > This is a rather recent development, so maybe not everyone knows about > > it yet. You can look at the following commit for the details: > > > > 45f035ab9b8f45aaf1eb2213218b7e9c14af3fc2 > > > > It's been in linux-next for about 6 weeks and has also gone into > > 3.7-rc1. > > As long as we get build warnings for leaving out the __devinit/__devexit > annotations, I would generally recommend putting them in. If we do a > patch to remove all of them, a couple extra instances will not cause > any more troubles than we already have. I've never seen any build warnings for leaving __devinit/__devexit out. Where does that happen? Thierry -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 836 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thierry Reding Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] PWM: vt8500: Update vt8500 PWM driver support Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 14:07:06 +0200 Message-ID: <20121022120706.GA19467@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> References: <1350643135-13197-1-git-send-email-linux@prisktech.co.nz> <1350888712.3592.11.camel@gitbox> <20121022071118.GA30026@avionic-0098.mockup.avionic-design.de> <201210221150.22004.arnd@arndb.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="5vNYLRcllDrimb99" Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201210221150.22004.arnd@arndb.de> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Arnd Bergmann Cc: Tony Prisk , arm@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, devicetree-discuss@lists.ozlabs.org List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org --5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 11:50:21AM +0000, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Monday 22 October 2012, Thierry Reding wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 07:51:52PM +1300, Tony Prisk wrote: > > > Replies to your comments inline: > > >=20 > > > On Mon, 2012-10-22 at 08:34 +0200, Thierry Reding wrote: > > > ... > > > > > -static int __devinit pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > > +static const struct of_device_id vt8500_pwm_dt_ids[] =3D { > > > > > + { .compatible =3D "via,vt8500-pwm", }, > > > > > + { /* Sentinel */ } > > > > > +}; > > > > > + > > > > > +static int __devinit vt8500_pwm_probe(struct platform_device *pd= ev) > > > >=20 > > > > Since you're changing this line anyway, maybe you should drop __dev= init > > > > (and __devexit for the .remove() callback). HOTPLUG is always enabl= ed > > > > nowadays and will go away eventually, in which case these will need= to > > > > be removed anyway. > > >=20 > > > Will do. I must say the inconstancy among comments is rather > > > frustrating. In another patch I sent out a few days ago (completely > > > unrelated to this), I told to add __devexit to a remove() function :\ > >=20 > > This is a rather recent development, so maybe not everyone knows about > > it yet. You can look at the following commit for the details: > >=20 > > 45f035ab9b8f45aaf1eb2213218b7e9c14af3fc2 > >=20 > > It's been in linux-next for about 6 weeks and has also gone into > > 3.7-rc1. >=20 > As long as we get build warnings for leaving out the __devinit/__devexit > annotations, I would generally recommend putting them in. If we do a > patch to remove all of them, a couple extra instances will not cause > any more troubles than we already have. I've never seen any build warnings for leaving __devinit/__devexit out. Where does that happen? Thierry --5vNYLRcllDrimb99 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQhTbqAAoJEN0jrNd/PrOhVQsQALXPdXeOqksWFQNXvBbpqGW+ p34VHr793rzP7DJyrneecXRYjiMrhqoed9HbNiOtlIDf/UR6GJpQlkwWzl6euGXe GSjruZVFT8jigQ3vyToeiXPvVBq90PsxksaFz/s7rnx+F0azWummBkCQk+U987hW gJEIb49vtHQ6zBxVKRbvpQzYML8jSeaBM/J44QAJOvhvrc4cP/S61lrKK0SzGL6d VFLS1LWdyZaevS5d0z0GsbvVnkNPOF5o+WqS5EqXs98cFv+jYN0HHDYFO3u7hiXx vEb/GM7yQBI1toZCclCx/MzV8UxTplfM9cRhwU64nfb6ubhTAARYkh2fEQ52Ompq Cug8cz/UQPb4cdNFearO1MXMD6cca3hm8Iyu7oyP4CI6SvdQjrctMsSuQeE4uB1Z Cg82pt8E9LclljeZNBr6Por6u6ZEU1C9rfzwQwIEHCk/8mTWwSlsq49nku9qQDES 2Lpmd149mFrSfBwYNEt0XpaQTXNrmsnICCGjPsYhgp3ExQm1y1NAqxgmQREyqhXx DIZkmKC+2oMrLMoIIycWXdw8o2A8oEqlcCqbDyyvfOyGJ8ILAz69tdriKjn21zoK liTJgMtcCTCcGjAVp2yMbpNPiEjtboWyIO0Ann+LLswTNYR3jQt4jWFQeIXmxMZR FrPFt3BV2GYtpXOR8OPt =K14Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --5vNYLRcllDrimb99--