From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Uwe Kleine-König" <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel@pengutronix.de,
"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] platform: Provide a remove callback that returns no value
Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2022 17:15:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y5NfLponxRO7j6nd@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221209155207.pyugk2dhpyht5gph@pengutronix.de>
On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 04:52:07PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> Hello Greg,
>
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 04:21:30PM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 04:09:14PM +0100, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
> > > struct platform_driver::remove returning an integer made driver authors
> > > expect that returning an error code was proper error handling. However
> > > the driver core ignores the error and continues to remove the device
> > > because there is nothing the core could do anyhow and reentering the
> > > remove callback again is only calling for trouble.
> > >
> > > So this is an source for errors typically yielding resource leaks in the
> > > error path.
> > >
> > > As there are too many platform drivers to neatly convert them all to
> > > return void in a single go, do it in several steps after this patch:
> > >
> > > a) Convert all drivers to implement .remove_new() returning void instead
> > > of .remove() returning int;
> > > b) Change struct platform_driver::remove() to return void and so make
> > > it identical to .remove_new();
> > > c) Change all drivers back to .remove() now with the better prototype;
> >
> > Change c) seems like it will be just as much work as a), right?
>
> Yeah, but c) should be trivially doable per subsystem using coccinelle.
> So my plan is to do a) per subsystem with one patch per driver and c)
> with one patch per subsystem.
>
> > Who is going to do the work of the conversion to this new prototype?
> > I'll be glad to take this, but I don't want to see a half-finished
> > conversion happen and us stuck with a "new" and "old" call, as that
> > would just be a mess.
>
> The idea is that this becomes my new pet project once
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20221118224540.619276-1-uwe@kleine-koenig.org
> is complete. :-)
>
> I intend to work on that once the patch under discussion is included in
> an -rc1.
Ok, I'll wait to queue this up to my tree until after 6.2-rc1 is out,
thanks.
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-09 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-09 15:09 [PATCH] platform: Provide a remove callback that returns no value Uwe Kleine-König
2022-12-09 15:21 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2022-12-09 15:52 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2022-12-09 16:15 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2023-01-12 8:20 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-01-13 11:43 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2023-01-13 17:40 ` Uwe Kleine-König
2023-01-17 18:05 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
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=Y5NfLponxRO7j6nd@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kernel@pengutronix.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de \
/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