From: pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com (Pramod Gurav)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Add remove function and remove gpio_chip on failure
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 10:18:48 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <540940B0.5090000@smartplayin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5408AA8C.7040100@linaro.org>
Hi Srini,
Thanks for review.
On 04-09-2014 11:38 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Pramod,
> sorry for delay in reply as I was travelling, still in Jet lag.
>> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> index 5475374..9296845 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static int st_gpiolib_register_bank(struct st_pinctrl *info,
>> 0, handle_simple_irq,
>> IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
>> if (err) {
>> + gpiochip_remove(&bank->gpio_chip);
> This change-set looks good.
> IMO, you can send a patch for this change set.
Will resend just this.
>
>> dev_info(dev, "could not add irqchip\n");
>> return err;
>> }
>> @@ -1685,6 +1686,29 @@ static int st_pctl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>
>> +static int st_pctl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
> Ideally this driver will not be removed, as other drivers depend on
> this, even the serial.
>
> so I see no big achievement in adding the remove functionality, as this
> is going to be a dead code and would never be tested.
>
>> + struct st_pinctrl *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
>> + struct device_node *child;
>> + struct gpio_chip gpio_chip;
>> + int bank = 0;
>> +
>
>> + if (info->nbanks) {
>> + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
>> + if (of_property_read_bool(child, "gpio-controller")) {
> We should not re-parse the DT nodes once we are done with it in the probe.
Thanks. :)
>
>> + gpio_chip = info->banks[bank].gpio_chip;
>> + gpiochip_remove(&gpio_chip);
>> + bank++;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>
> I think the logic is very simple:
>
> while (nbanks--)
> gpiochip_remove(&info->banks[bank++].gpio_chip))
Thanks again. Remove is not needed hence will not do this. But good know.
>
>
> thanks,
> srini
>> + pinctrl_unregister(info->pctl);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .driver = {
>> .name = "st-pinctrl",
>> @@ -1692,6 +1716,7 @@ static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .of_match_table = st_pctl_of_match,
>> },
>> .probe = st_pctl_probe,
>> + .remove = st_pctl_remove,
>> };
>>
>> static int __init st_pctl_init(void)
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo at vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com>
To: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kernel@stlinux.com
Cc: Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@gmail.com>,
Srinivas Kandagatla <srinivas.kandagatla@linaro.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coquelin@st.com>,
Patrice Chotard <patrice.chotard@st.com>,
Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
Bjorn Andersson <bjorn.andersson@sonymobile.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Add remove function and remove gpio_chip on failure
Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2014 10:18:48 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <540940B0.5090000@smartplayin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5408AA8C.7040100@linaro.org>
Hi Srini,
Thanks for review.
On 04-09-2014 11:38 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Pramod,
> sorry for delay in reply as I was travelling, still in Jet lag.
>> Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com>
>> ---
>> drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>> 1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> index 5475374..9296845 100644
>> --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
>> @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static int st_gpiolib_register_bank(struct st_pinctrl *info,
>> 0, handle_simple_irq,
>> IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
>> if (err) {
>> + gpiochip_remove(&bank->gpio_chip);
> This change-set looks good.
> IMO, you can send a patch for this change set.
Will resend just this.
>
>> dev_info(dev, "could not add irqchip\n");
>> return err;
>> }
>> @@ -1685,6 +1686,29 @@ static int st_pctl_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>
>> +static int st_pctl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>> +{
> Ideally this driver will not be removed, as other drivers depend on
> this, even the serial.
>
> so I see no big achievement in adding the remove functionality, as this
> is going to be a dead code and would never be tested.
>
>> + struct st_pinctrl *info = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>> + struct device_node *np = pdev->dev.of_node;
>> + struct device_node *child;
>> + struct gpio_chip gpio_chip;
>> + int bank = 0;
>> +
>
>> + if (info->nbanks) {
>> + for_each_child_of_node(np, child) {
>> + if (of_property_read_bool(child, "gpio-controller")) {
> We should not re-parse the DT nodes once we are done with it in the probe.
Thanks. :)
>
>> + gpio_chip = info->banks[bank].gpio_chip;
>> + gpiochip_remove(&gpio_chip);
>> + bank++;
>> + }
>> + }
>> + }
>> +
>
> I think the logic is very simple:
>
> while (nbanks--)
> gpiochip_remove(&info->banks[bank++].gpio_chip))
Thanks again. Remove is not needed hence will not do this. But good know.
>
>
> thanks,
> srini
>> + pinctrl_unregister(info->pctl);
>> +
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .driver = {
>> .name = "st-pinctrl",
>> @@ -1692,6 +1716,7 @@ static struct platform_driver st_pctl_driver = {
>> .of_match_table = st_pctl_of_match,
>> },
>> .probe = st_pctl_probe,
>> + .remove = st_pctl_remove,
>> };
>>
>> static int __init st_pctl_init(void)
>>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-05 4:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-30 14:45 [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Add remove function and remove gpio_chip on failure Pramod Gurav
2014-08-30 14:45 ` Pramod Gurav
2014-09-04 16:53 ` Linus Walleij
2014-09-04 16:53 ` Linus Walleij
2014-09-04 18:08 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2014-09-04 18:08 ` Srinivas Kandagatla
2014-09-05 4:48 ` Pramod Gurav [this message]
2014-09-05 4:48 ` Pramod Gurav
2014-09-05 7:27 ` Maxime Coquelin
2014-09-05 7:27 ` Maxime Coquelin
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=540940B0.5090000@smartplayin.com \
--to=pramod.gurav@smartplayin.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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.