From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: guz.fnst@cn.fujitsu.com (Gu Zheng)
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 16:00:19 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 00/19] driver:usb&net: add missing platform_driver owner
In-Reply-To: <20130521084108.1a585f32@skate>
References: <1369104120-35552-1-git-send-email-libo.chen@huawei.com>
 <20130520.232619.964940909999914694.davem@davemloft.net>
 <20130521084108.1a585f32@skate>
Message-ID: <519B2993.4090409@cn.fujitsu.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 05/21/2013 02:41 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:

> Dear David Miller,
> 
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 23:26:19 -0700 (PDT), David Miller wrote:
>> From: Libo Chen <libo.chen@huawei.com>
>> Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 10:42:00 +0800
>>
>>> I find a lot of mistakes using struct platform_driver without owner.
>>> So I pick up some of them including usb and net modules
>>
>> Instead of doing it this way, which is obviously error prone and
>> easy to forget, make platform_driver_register() be a macro which
>> sets the module owner field then calls the real
>> __platform_driver_register().
> 
> Or, maybe make the existing module_platform_driver() macro do this?


But not all the modules use module_platform_driver() macro to replace the module init/exit.

Thanks,
Gu

> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Thomas