Re: [PATCH] Minor change to platform_device_register_simple prototype

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Wed, Dec 07, 2005 at 05:59:24PM -0500, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> 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..

Ok, that's fine with me.  Russell, any objections?

thanks,

greg k-h