From: s.hauer@pengutronix.de (Sascha Hauer)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: imx: Add common imx cpuidle init functionality.
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 22:21:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120502202101.GA16535@pengutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMXH7KGLHD8uimSnf8=0t15F7KcFiPuL=3bebY309MbaA75USA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 02:16:36PM -0500, Rob Lee wrote:
> Sascha,
>
> >> +int __init imx_cpuidle_init(struct cpuidle_driver *drv)
> >> +{
> >> + ? ? struct cpuidle_device *dev;
> >> + ? ? int cpu_id, ret;
> >> +
> >> + ? ? if (!drv || drv->state_count > CPUIDLE_STATE_MAX) {
> >
> > Please don't check for !drv here. When someone calls this function with
> > a NULL pointer he should get a nive stack trace allowing him to figure
> > out what went wrong.
> >
>
> Ok, I will change this in v3. Given your statement, my understanding
> is that I should avoid adding checks to make sure a valid driver
> object was given as the stack trace information is all the handling
> that is needed. If there is any further logic needed in that rule,
> could you elaborate so that I don't make this mistake in the future,
> or so that I don't add a check on a driver object in a case that I
> should?
Here we have the case that only a Kernel developer will add a call to
this function. For a kernel developer a stack trace is more useful
than a pr_err. Of course this is different when not testing for a NULL
pointer causes subtle bugs in unrelated code.
> >
> > You should only unregister the cpuidle devices you successfully
> > registered. Unregistering not yet registered cpuidle devices probably
> > has unwanted side effects.
> >
>
> I did not add in this handling because the cpuidle_unregister_device()
> call already has a "registered" check so extra handling seemed
> unnecessary. But if you still think it is needed just let me know.
>
It's ok then. I didn't check cpuidle_unregister_device.
Sascha
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Peiner Str. 6-8, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-02 20:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-02 2:12 [PATCH v2 0/3] Add imx cpuidle Robert Lee
2012-05-02 2:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] ARM: imx: Add common imx cpuidle init functionality Robert Lee
2012-05-02 3:13 ` Shawn Guo
2012-05-02 13:59 ` Rob Lee
2012-05-02 14:07 ` Shawn Guo
2012-05-02 14:09 ` Rob Lee
2012-05-02 7:27 ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-02 19:16 ` Rob Lee
2012-05-02 20:21 ` Sascha Hauer [this message]
2012-05-02 2:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] ARM: imx: Add imx5 cpuidle driver Robert Lee
2012-05-02 7:33 ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-02 20:11 ` Rob Lee
2012-05-03 6:39 ` Sascha Hauer
2012-05-02 2:12 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] ARM: imx: Add imx6q " Robert Lee
2012-05-02 3:23 ` Shawn Guo
2012-05-02 13:50 ` Rob Lee
2012-05-02 13:53 ` Shawn Guo
2012-05-02 3:03 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Add imx cpuidle Shawn Guo
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=20120502202101.GA16535@pengutronix.de \
--to=s.hauer@pengutronix.de \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).