On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 4:40 PM Serge Semin
<Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 01:00:57AM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> > On Tuesday, May 26, 2020, Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > AXI3-bus is the main communication bus connecting all high-speed
> > > peripheral IP-cores with RAM controller and MIPS P5600 cores on Baikal-T1
> > > SoC. Bus traffic arbitration is done by means of DW AMBA 3 AXI
> > > Interconnect (so called AXI Main Interconnect) routing IO requests from
> > > one SoC block to another. This driver provides a way to detect any bus
> > > protocol errors and device not responding situations by means of an
> > > embedded on top of the interconnect errors handler block (EHB). AXI
> > > Interconnect QoS arbitration tuning is currently unsupported.
> > > The bus doesn't provide a way to detect the interconnected devices,
> > > so they are supposed to be statically defined like by means of the
> > > simple-bus sub-nodes.
> >
> >
> >
> > Few comments in case if you need a new version. Main point is about
> > sysfs_streq().
>
> Hello, Andy. Thanks for your comments. I'll address most of them in a follow-up
> patches. See just one note below.
>
> >
> >
> > > Signed-off-by: Serge Semin <Sergey.Semin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Alexey Malahov <Alexey.Malahov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Paul Burton <paulburton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Olof Johansson <olof@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: Rob Herring <robh+dt@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: linux-mips@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: soc@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc: devicetree@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
>
> [nip]
>
> > > +
> > > +static void bt1_axi_clear_data(void *data)
> > > +{
> > > + struct bt1_axi *axi = data;
> > > + struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(axi->dev);
> > > +
> > > + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, NULL);
> >
> >
>
> > Doesn't device driver core do this already?
>
> It doesn't on remove.
__device_release_driver() calls dev_set_drvdata(dev, NULL);
What did I miss?
> This cleanups the drvdata pointer when the driver is
> unloaded at the moment of remove() callback calling. This is a good
> practice to leave the device the same as it has been before usage including
> the pointer value. In this case if theoretically someone (though very
> unlikely, but anyway) would try to use the pointer without having it
> initialized, the NULL-dereference would pop up, otherwise we may
> corrupt someones memory, which is very nasty.
The above is right and I agree with.
--
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko
