From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, MENTIONS_GIT_HOSTING,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315EFC433E0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 22:14:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040BD208E4 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 22:14:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590531274; bh=tXeGpvj2RF9xQbboP5Vw6Trs0atJu/YCHDxopJSGwuc=; h=Subject:To:From:Date:List-ID:From; b=Pu8LJqn2eB5TqwSGBwCma/YVHE4TpuPd35zcHawAhmUNv65zvRFcqbCbScAkYTNxl v/WjjHBx1M6hrPHXgjqtj07O/Jg8NGWkNaGLQEEwe2DKC8mhcbahf6kITRugPoR22x 29tse4OC1o7/RxGhQbMkiLCJyi0YvIATE5t1214U= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2391329AbgEZWOd (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 18:14:33 -0400 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:50336 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2390125AbgEZWOd (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 18:14:33 -0400 Received: from localhost (83-86-89-107.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [83.86.89.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 28D77208DB; Tue, 26 May 2020 22:14:32 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1590531272; bh=tXeGpvj2RF9xQbboP5Vw6Trs0atJu/YCHDxopJSGwuc=; h=Subject:To:From:Date:From; b=18BHbVFR6hZWs89PveRw5cgIbF8WQ+t6XJN8b/NUXIr3aZxh7ICW3brMEVeZ5IWL5 +GweMtODQL+DJlGTmnK6usadZjL/JIcLH1WAzZPu4IltCzQ19FHivHWzSYQbjYTw1m x9Lyuj4vmP3VPW1y2KrAYLaoUN6NqRTxfL0q3Vak= Subject: patch "software node: implement software_node_unregister()" added to driver-core-testing To: gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com, brendanhiggins@google.com, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, heikki.krogerus@linux.intel.com, linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk, linux@roeck-us.net, naresh.kamboju@linaro.org, pmladek@suse.com, rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com, rdunlap@infradead.org, rong.a.chen@intel.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, sakari.ailus@linux.intel.com, sergey.senozhatsky@gmail.com, stable@vger.kernel.org From: Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 00:14:29 +0200 Message-ID: <15905312691574@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ANSI_X3.4-1968 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: stable-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: stable@vger.kernel.org This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled software node: implement software_node_unregister() to my driver-core git tree which can be found at git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/gregkh/driver-core.git in the driver-core-testing branch. The patch will show up in the next release of the linux-next tree (usually sometime within the next 24 hours during the week.) The patch will be merged to the driver-core-next branch sometime soon, after it passes testing, and the merge window is open. If you have any questions about this process, please let me know. >From 46d26819a5056f4831649c5887ad5c71a16d86f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman Date: Sun, 24 May 2020 17:30:40 +0200 Subject: software node: implement software_node_unregister() Sometimes it is better to unregister individual nodes instead of trying to do them all at once with software_node_unregister_nodes(), so create software_node_unregister() so that you can unregister them one at a time. This is especially important when creating nodes in a hierarchy, with parent -> children representations. Children always need to be removed before a parent is, as the swnode logic assumes this is going to be the case. Fix up the lib/test_printf.c fwnode_pointer() test which to use this new function as it had the problem of tearing things down in the backwards order. Fixes: f1ce39df508d ("lib/test_printf: Add tests for %pfw printk modifier") Cc: stable Cc: Andy Shevchenko Cc: Brendan Higgins Cc: Dmitry Torokhov Cc: Petr Mladek Cc: Rafael J. Wysocki Cc: Rasmus Villemoes Cc: Sakari Ailus Cc: Sergey Senozhatsky Cc: Steven Rostedt Reported-by: Naresh Kamboju Reported-by: kernel test robot Reported-by: Randy Dunlap Tested-by: Petr Mladek Tested-by: Randy Dunlap Tested-by: Guenter Roeck Reviewed-by: Heikki Krogerus Acked-by: Randy Dunlap Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200524153041.2361-1-gregkh@linuxfoundation.org Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/base/swnode.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++------ include/linux/property.h | 1 + lib/test_printf.c | 4 +++- 3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/base/swnode.c b/drivers/base/swnode.c index de8d3543e8fe..770b1f47a625 100644 --- a/drivers/base/swnode.c +++ b/drivers/base/swnode.c @@ -712,17 +712,18 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(software_node_register_nodes); * @nodes: Zero terminated array of software nodes to be unregistered * * Unregister multiple software nodes at once. + * + * NOTE: Be careful using this call if the nodes had parent pointers set up in + * them before registering. If so, it is wiser to remove the nodes + * individually, in the correct order (child before parent) instead of relying + * on the sequential order of the list of nodes in the array. */ void software_node_unregister_nodes(const struct software_node *nodes) { - struct swnode *swnode; int i; - for (i = 0; nodes[i].name; i++) { - swnode = software_node_to_swnode(&nodes[i]); - if (swnode) - fwnode_remove_software_node(&swnode->fwnode); - } + for (i = 0; nodes[i].name; i++) + software_node_unregister(&nodes[i]); } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(software_node_unregister_nodes); @@ -741,6 +742,20 @@ int software_node_register(const struct software_node *node) } EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(software_node_register); +/** + * software_node_unregister - Unregister static software node + * @node: The software node to be unregistered + */ +void software_node_unregister(const struct software_node *node) +{ + struct swnode *swnode; + + swnode = software_node_to_swnode(node); + if (swnode) + fwnode_remove_software_node(&swnode->fwnode); +} +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(software_node_unregister); + struct fwnode_handle * fwnode_create_software_node(const struct property_entry *properties, const struct fwnode_handle *parent) diff --git a/include/linux/property.h b/include/linux/property.h index d86de017c689..0d4099b4ce1f 100644 --- a/include/linux/property.h +++ b/include/linux/property.h @@ -441,6 +441,7 @@ int software_node_register_nodes(const struct software_node *nodes); void software_node_unregister_nodes(const struct software_node *nodes); int software_node_register(const struct software_node *node); +void software_node_unregister(const struct software_node *node); int software_node_notify(struct device *dev, unsigned long action); diff --git a/lib/test_printf.c b/lib/test_printf.c index 6b1622f4d7c2..fc63b8959d42 100644 --- a/lib/test_printf.c +++ b/lib/test_printf.c @@ -637,7 +637,9 @@ static void __init fwnode_pointer(void) test(second_name, "%pfwP", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[1])); test(third_name, "%pfwP", software_node_fwnode(&softnodes[2])); - software_node_unregister_nodes(softnodes); + software_node_unregister(&softnodes[2]); + software_node_unregister(&softnodes[1]); + software_node_unregister(&softnodes[0]); } static void __init -- 2.26.2