Re: [PATCH] Minor change to platform_device_register_simple prototype

Dmitry Torokhov
2005-12-07T22:59:26Z

On 12/7/05, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 05:18:40PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > On 12/7/05, Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > Unregistering is just a matter of calling platform_device_unregister().
> > > An unregister call is a del + put in exactly the same way as it is
> > > throughout the rest of the driver model.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, and it works just fine everywhere except in initialization code
> > when you need to jump in the middle of _del + _put sequence.
>
> So, if you had _del, would it work easier for you? I just objected to
> it if it wasn't necessary. I didn't want to add functions that aren't
> used by anyone, but if is needed, I don't see a problem with it.
>

Yes, the I can just write:

...
err = platform_driver_register(&i8042_driver);
if (err)
goto err_controller_cleanup;

i8042_platform_device = platform_device_alloc("i8042", -1);
if (!i8042_platform_device) {
err = -ENOMEM;
goto err_unregister_driver;
}

err = platform_device_add(i8042_platform_device);
if (err)
goto err_free_device;
...

if (!have_ports) {
err = -ENODEV;
goto err_delete_device;
}

mod_timer(&i8042_timer, jiffies + I8042_POLL_PERIOD);
return 0;

err_delete_device:
platform_device_del(i8042_platform_device);
err_free_device:
platform_device_put(i8042_platform_device);
err_unregister_driver:
platform_driver_unregister(&i8042_driver);
....

As you can see - single cleanup path..

--
Dmitry