public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
To: Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com>
Cc: <linux-omap@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>,
	Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>, "Cousson\,
	Benoit" <b-cousson@ti.com>, Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] gpio/omap: add *remove* callback in platform_driver
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:25:44 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87394xhocn.fsf@ti.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1341997995-14020-3-git-send-email-tarun.kanti@ti.com> (Tarun Kanti DebBarma's message of "Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:43:15 +0530")

Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com> writes:

> Add *remove* callback so that necessary cleanup operations are
> performed when device is unregistered. 

How was this tested?  on what platforms?  

> The device is deleted
> from the list and associated clock handle is released by
> calling clk_put() and irq descriptor is released using the
> irq_free_desc() api.

There is quite a bit of other things to do in remove to properly cleanup
what is done in probe.

Also, what happens when a 'remove' is triwhen there are GPIOs that 
are still requested and in use, especially if they are GPIO IRQs.

Also, what about runtime PM?

In short, this seems very premature and I suspect untested.

Kevin

> Signed-off-by: Tarun Kanti DebBarma <tarun.kanti@ti.com>
> Reported-by: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
> Reviewed-by: Jon Hunter <jon-hunter@ti.com>
> Cc: Kevin Hilman <khilman@ti.com>
> Cc: Rajendra Nayak <rnayak@ti.com>
> Cc: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@ti.com>
> Cc: Cousson, Benoit <b-cousson@ti.com>
> Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul@pwsan.com>
> ---
>  drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c |   30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
> index afecdcc..08929d5 100644
> --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
> +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-omap.c
> @@ -1140,6 +1140,35 @@ static int __devinit omap_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> +/**
> + * omap_gpio_remove - cleanup a registered gpio device
> + * @pdev:       pointer to current gpio platform device
> + *
> + * Called by driver framework whenever a gpio device is unregistered.
> + * GPIO is deleted from the list and associated clock handle freed.
> + */
> +static int __devexit omap_gpio_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> +{
> +	struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> +	struct gpio_bank *bank;
> +	unsigned long flags;
> +	int ret = -EINVAL;
> +
> +	list_for_each_entry(bank, &omap_gpio_list, node) {
> +		spin_lock_irqsave(&bank->lock, flags);
> +		if (bank->dev == dev) {
> +			list_del(&bank->node);
> +			clk_put(bank->dbck);
> +			irq_free_desc(bank->irq_base);
> +			ret = 0;
> +			spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
> +			break;
> +		}
> +		spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bank->lock, flags);
> +	}
> +	return ret;
> +}
> +
>  #ifdef CONFIG_ARCH_OMAP2PLUS
>  
>  #if defined(CONFIG_PM_RUNTIME)
> @@ -1466,6 +1495,7 @@ MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(of, omap_gpio_match);
>  
>  static struct platform_driver omap_gpio_driver = {
>  	.probe		= omap_gpio_probe,
> +	.remove = __devexit_p(omap_gpio_remove),
>  	.driver		= {
>  		.name	= "omap_gpio",
>  		.pm	= &gpio_pm_ops,

  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-07-11 23:25 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-11  9:13 [PATCH 0/2] gpio/omap: few code realignment and update of missing code Tarun Kanti DebBarma
2012-07-11  9:13 ` [PATCH 1/2] gpio/omap: move bank->dbck initialization to omap_gpio_mod_init() Tarun Kanti DebBarma
2012-07-11 17:51   ` Paul Walmsley
2012-07-11 17:56     ` DebBarma, Tarun Kanti
2012-07-11 21:51   ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-11  9:13 ` [PATCH 2/2] gpio/omap: add *remove* callback in platform_driver Tarun Kanti DebBarma
2012-07-11 21:54   ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-11 23:25   ` Kevin Hilman [this message]
2012-07-12 11:03     ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-12 17:48       ` Kevin Hilman
2012-07-14 20:51         ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 17:10           ` Kevin Hilman
2012-07-16 20:49             ` Linus Walleij
2012-07-16 22:01               ` Kevin Hilman
2012-07-17  6:03             ` Shilimkar, Santosh

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87394xhocn.fsf@ti.com \
    --to=khilman@ti.com \
    --cc=b-cousson@ti.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-omap@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul@pwsan.com \
    --cc=rnayak@ti.com \
    --cc=santosh.shilimkar@ti.com \
    --cc=tarun.kanti@ti.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox