On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 02:25:48PM +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote:
> On 07/26/2011 02:02 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 01:36:00PM +0800, Wanlong Gao wrote:
> >>On 07/26/2011 12:39 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>
> >>>>+
> >>>>+ if (drv->remove) {
> >>>>+ dev_dbg(_dev, "remove\n");
> >>>>+ status = drv->remove(dev);
> >>>>+ } else {
> >>>>+ status = 0;
> >>>>+ }
> >>>
> >>>Again, why would remove ever be NULL?
> >>>
> >>>This whole thing isn't needed at all.
> >>>
> >>>greg k-h
> >>Yeah, I see.
> >>
> >>But Greg, why does i2c-core do this?
> >>like:drivers/i2c/i2c-core.c:
> >
> >The i2c core has different requirements than the driver core does,
> >right? They are two totally different things, please don't assume that
> >the rules for one are the same for the other.
> >
> >greg k-h
> >
> Hmm...They are totally different things, maybe I see..
Still, it would make sense to clean up platform device's drvdata
pointer, so that every platform driver out there does not have to do it
on its own.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
