From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.87 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1ckzoW-0000fm-36 for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 06 Mar 2017 21:05:06 +0000 Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2017 23:04:26 +0200 From: Jarkko Sakkinen To: Logan Gunthorpe Cc: Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dan Williams , Alexander Viro , Johannes Thumshirn , Jan Kara , Arnd Bergmann , Sajjan Vikas C , Dmitry Torokhov , Linus Walleij , Alexandre Courbot , Peter Huewe , Marcel Selhorst , Jason Gunthorpe , Olof Johansson , Doug Ledford , Sean Hefty , Hal Rosenstock , Dmitry Vyukov , Haggai Eran , Parav Pandit , Leon Romanovsky , Hartmut Knaack , Lars-Peter Clausen , Peter Meerwald-Stadler , Hans Verkuil , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Artem Bityutskiy , Richard Weinberger , David Woodhouse , Brian Norris , Boris Brezillon , Marek Vasut , Cyrille Pitchen , Matt Porter , Alexandre Bounine , Andrew Morton , Joe Perches , Lorenzo Stoakes , Vladimir Zapolskiy , Alessandro Zummo , Alexandre Belloni , Boaz Harrosh , "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , Stephen Bates , Bjorn Helgaas , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-gpio@vger.kernel.org, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 06/16] tpm-chip: utilize new cdev_device_add helper function Message-ID: <20170306210426.qeftgujergryutie@intel.com> References: <1488783873-2614-1-git-send-email-logang@deltatee.com> <1488783873-2614-7-git-send-email-logang@deltatee.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1488783873-2614-7-git-send-email-logang@deltatee.com> List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:04:22AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote: > Replace the open coded registration of the cdev and dev with the > new device_add_cdev() helper. The helper replaces a common pattern by > taking the proper reference against the parent device and adding both > the cdev and the device. > > Signed-off-by: Logan Gunthorpe > Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe > --- > drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c | 19 +++---------------- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c > index c406343..935f0e9 100644 > --- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c > +++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c > @@ -187,7 +187,6 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_chip_alloc(struct device *pdev, > > cdev_init(&chip->cdev, &tpm_fops); > chip->cdev.owner = THIS_MODULE; > - chip->cdev.kobj.parent = &chip->dev.kobj; > > return chip; > > @@ -230,27 +229,16 @@ static int tpm_add_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip) > { > int rc; > > - rc = cdev_add(&chip->cdev, chip->dev.devt, 1); > + rc = cdev_device_add(&chip->cdev, &chip->dev); > if (rc) { > dev_err(&chip->dev, > - "unable to cdev_add() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n", > + "unable to cdev_device_add() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n", > dev_name(&chip->dev), MAJOR(chip->dev.devt), > MINOR(chip->dev.devt), rc); > > return rc; > } > > - rc = device_add(&chip->dev); > - if (rc) { > - dev_err(&chip->dev, > - "unable to device_register() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n", > - dev_name(&chip->dev), MAJOR(chip->dev.devt), > - MINOR(chip->dev.devt), rc); > - > - cdev_del(&chip->cdev); > - return rc; > - } > - > /* Make the chip available. */ > mutex_lock(&idr_lock); > idr_replace(&dev_nums_idr, chip, chip->dev_num); > @@ -261,8 +249,7 @@ static int tpm_add_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip) > > static void tpm_del_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip) > { > - cdev_del(&chip->cdev); > - device_del(&chip->dev); > + cdev_device_del(&chip->cdev, &chip->dev); > > /* Make the chip unavailable. */ > mutex_lock(&idr_lock); > -- > 2.1.4 > Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen I cannot test this at this point as security tree does not include the commit that is dependent on this. I'm also wondering if this commit is even going through my tree to upstream? /Jarkko