Re: [PATCH] Minor change to platform_device_register_simple prototype

Dmitry Torokhov
2005-12-07T18:23:14Z

On 12/7/05, Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 12:59:09PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov > > I have started moving drivers from the "_simple" interface and I found
> > that I'm missing platform_device_del that would complement
> > platform_device_add. Would you object to having such a function, like
> > we do for other sysfs objects? With it one can write somthing like
> > this:
>
> Greg and myself discussed that, and we decided that it was adding
> unnecessary complexity to the interface. Maybe Greg's view has
> changed?
>

How do you write error handling path without the _del function if
platform_device_add is not the last call? you can't call
platform_device_unregister() and then platform_device_put(). And I
don't like to take extra references in error path or assign the
pointer to NULL in teh middle of unwinding...

--
Dmitry