On Sat, Dec 9, 2017 at 2:54 AM, Sinan Kaya <okaya@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 12/8/2017 8:54 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>>> static int ged_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
>>> +{
>>> + struct acpi_ged_device *geddev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
>>>
>>> + ged_cleanup_irq(geddev);
>> Do you really need this duplication? You may as well call
>> ged_shutdown() from here.
>>
>> And the local variable is redundant too.
>>
>> I guess it would be better to just fold ged_cleanup_irq() into
>> ged_shutdown() and call that from ged_remove().
>>
>
> I originally tried to make these two APIs as common as possible and tried
> calling shutdown from remove. However, the calling convention of shutdown
> and remove are different.
Look at the code in your patch: ged_shutdown() does exactly the same
things as ged_remove(), except that ged_remove() returns 0 in addition
to that, so you can do it this way:
static int int ged_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
{
ged_shutdown(pdev);
return 0;
}
Why wouldn't that work?
> Shutdown returns void; whereas, remove returns an integer. That's why, I
> created a common function and called from both places.
>
> I can probably make the calling parameter of ged_cleanup_irq() a pdev and
> get rid of the additional casting in these two different functions.
>
> Let me know if you have a better idea.
And with the above, you can fold your ged_cleanup_irq() into
ged_shutdown(), can't you?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arm-msm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
