nvpublic > On Fri, Aug 17, 2012 at 02:16:28AM -0700, Bill Huang wrote: > [...] > > diff --git a/drivers/mfd/tps6586x.c b/drivers/mfd/tps6586x.c > [...] > > @@ -505,6 +519,11 @@ static int __devinit tps6586x_i2c_probe(struct i2c_client *client, > > goto err_add_devs; > > } > > > > + tps6586x_dev = &client->dev; > > + > > + if (pdata->pm_off && !pm_power_off) > > + pm_power_off = tps6586x_power_off; > > + > > I think the assignment of tps6586x_dev needs to go inside the if block as well. Otherwise it might be > overwritten by another instance for systems that actually have more than one tps6586x. Since currently > the driver can't be built as a module it probably makes little sense to clean this up in .remove(), > but it might still be worth adding so it isn't forgotten if and when somebody tries to convert the > driver to a module. > Thanks, good point. > I should note that I don't like very much how the pm_power_off works. > Maybe this should really be changed to allow passing a context for the function to work from. > Something like: > > pm_power_off = tps6586x_power_off; > pm_power_off_data = &client->dev; > > Where pm_power_off() would receive pm_power_off_data as an argument. > > Even that's not very pretty. On the other hand this doesn't really buy us much because only the > storage location of the variable would change and nothing else. But it would still make the > association of the data clearer. > > Thierry > > * Unknown Key > * 0x7F3EB3A1 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
