Hi Greg, On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> On 12/6/2017 11:41 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: >>> On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> On 12/6/2017 9:57 AM, Sinan Kaya wrote: >>>>>> Yes, it should, so I'm not sure why you need the list in the first place. >>>>>> >>>>>> Also it looks like something along the lines of devres_release_all() >>>>>> should be sufficient. >>>>> Good suggestion, let me test this. >>>>> >>>> >>>> I tried to pull the code into GED but the API is not public. I also looked >>>> at how it is used. I was afraid to mess up with the internals of base.c by >>>> calling devres_release_all() externally first and by the driver framework >>>> next. I moved away from this approach. >>> >>> Are you sure it is called by the core in the shutdown path? >> >> Sorry, I was thinking about a general case not the shutdown path. If we open >> this API and have device drivers call it from arbitrary places; then we could >> be opening a new can of worms that show up during device driver removal. [cut] > > OK > > Anyway, it looks like something is missing in the core. > > You shouldn't really need to do all that dance in a driver. We have a problem with the ACPI GED driver which essentially is a platform driver requesting a number of interrupts and handling them by dispatching a specific AML method. It uses devm_request_threaded_irq() to request the interrupts, so it doesn't need a ->remove() callback, but it turns out to need a ->shutdown() one to free all of these interrupts at the shutdown time. While we can add a ->shutdown() callback to it, that essentially needs to duplicate devres_release_all() somewhat. Any suggestions what to do with that? Thanks, Rafael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-acpi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
