On 2024-02-04 06:15, Xu Yilun wrote: > On Fri, Feb 02, 2024 at 06:44:01PM +0100, Marco Pagani wrote: >> >> >> On 2024-01-30 05:31, Xu Yilun wrote: >>>> +#define fpga_mgr_register_full(parent, info) \ >>>> + __fpga_mgr_register_full(parent, info, THIS_MODULE) >>>> struct fpga_manager * >>>> -fpga_mgr_register_full(struct device *parent, const struct fpga_manager_info *info); >>>> +__fpga_mgr_register_full(struct device *parent, const struct fpga_manager_info *info, >>>> + struct module *owner); >>>> >>>> +#define fpga_mgr_register(parent, name, mops, priv) \ >>>> + __fpga_mgr_register(parent, name, mops, priv, THIS_MODULE) >>>> struct fpga_manager * >>>> -fpga_mgr_register(struct device *parent, const char *name, >>>> - const struct fpga_manager_ops *mops, void *priv); >>>> +__fpga_mgr_register(struct device *parent, const char *name, >>>> + const struct fpga_manager_ops *mops, void *priv, struct module *owner); >>>> + >>>> void fpga_mgr_unregister(struct fpga_manager *mgr); >>>> >>>> +#define devm_fpga_mgr_register_full(parent, info) \ >>>> + __devm_fpga_mgr_register_full(parent, info, THIS_MODULE) >>>> struct fpga_manager * >>>> -devm_fpga_mgr_register_full(struct device *parent, const struct fpga_manager_info *info); >>>> +__devm_fpga_mgr_register_full(struct device *parent, const struct fpga_manager_info *info, >>>> + struct module *owner); >>> >>> Add a line here. I can do it myself if you agree. >> >> Sure, that is fine by me. I also spotted a typo in the commit log body >> (in taken -> is taken). Do you want me to send a v6, or do you prefer >> to fix that in place? > > No need, I can fix it. > >> >>> >>> There is still a RFC prefix for this patch. Are you ready to get it merged? >>> If yes, Acked-by: Xu Yilun <yilun.xu@xxxxxxxxx> >> >> I'm ready for the patch to be merged. However, I recently sent an RFC >> to propose a safer implementation of try_module_get() that would >> simplify the code and may also benefit other subsystems. What do you >> think? >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-modules/20240130193614.49772-1-marpagan@xxxxxxxxxx/ > > I suggest take your fix to linux-fpga/for-next now. If your try_module_get() > proposal is applied before the end of this cycle, we could re-evaluate > this patch. That's fine by me. Thanks, Marco
