On 23-06-22, 09:54, Pierre-Louis Bossart wrote:
>
>
> On 6/23/22 02:55, Vinod Koul wrote:
> > On 10-06-22, 09:51, Bard Liao wrote:
> >> From: Pierre-Louis Bossart <pierre-louis.bossart@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >>
> >> The bus sdw_drv_remove() and sdw_drv_shutdown() helpers are used
> >> conditionally, if the driver provides these routines.
> >>
> >> These helpers already test if the driver provides a .remove or
> >> .shutdown callback, so there's no harm in invoking the
> >> sdw_drv_remove() and sdw_drv_shutdown() unconditionally.
> >
> > Okay sounds good
> >
> >> In addition, the current code is imbalanced with
> >> dev_pm_domain_attach() called from sdw_drv_probe(), but
> >> dev_pm_domain_detach() called from sdw_drv_remove() only if the driver
> >> provides a .remove callback.
> >
> > Am not sure I follow what is imbalance, pm_domain_attach/detach?
>
> Yes, the dev_pm_domain_detach() is done conditionally, depending on the
> presence of a driver .remove callback, that's not so good.
Sorry am bit confused now, this is what I have in sdw-next
static int sdw_drv_remove(struct device *dev)
{
struct sdw_slave *slave = dev_to_sdw_dev(dev);
struct sdw_driver *drv = drv_to_sdw_driver(dev->driver);
int ret = 0;
if (drv->remove)
ret = drv->remove(slave);
dev_pm_domain_detach(dev, false);
return ret;
}
I see that dev_pm_domain_detach() is called unconditionally and not
dependent on remove method which seems right to me.
The code seems same since 9251345dca24b
--
~Vinod
