On Thu, 2020-11-12 at 18:25 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 5:44 PM Nicolas Saenz Julienne
> <nsaenzjulienne@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Itroduce devm_rpi_firmware_get(), it'll simplify the firmware handling
> > for most consumers.
> >
> > Suggested-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Nicolas Saenz Julienne <nsaenzjulienne@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >
> > Changes since v2:
> > - Introduce devm_rpi_firmware_get()
> >
> > drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++-
> > include/soc/bcm2835/raspberrypi-firmware.h | 8 ++++++
> > 2 files changed, 38 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c b/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> > index 438e17074a97..4ab2dfdc82ad 100644
> > --- a/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> > +++ b/drivers/firmware/raspberrypi.c
> > @@ -237,10 +237,17 @@ static void rpi_firmware_delete(struct kref *kref)
> > kfree(fw);
> > }
> >
> > -void rpi_firmware_put(struct rpi_firmware *fw)
> > +static void __rpi_firmware_put(void *data)
> > {
>
> The '__' prefix is very vague and usually used for unlocked variants
> of functions. The casting to void * in rpi_firmware_put() is also
> unneeded. I would much prefer that the devres release callback be
> called devm_rpi_firmware_put() and that it call rpi_firmware_put()
> which would then call kref_put().
Yes, that's better. I'll change it.
Regards,
Nicolas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
