Am Mittwoch 16 November 2011, 20:18:00 schrieben Sie:
> On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 07:28:35PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch 16 November 2011, 17:48:07 schrieb Dmitry Torokhov:
> > > On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 12:02:07PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > > > Hi Dmitry,
> > > >
> > > > Am Mittwoch 16 November 2011, 08:18:22 schrieb Dmitry Torokhov:
> > > > > Hi Heiko,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 10:43:47AM +0200, Heiko Stübner wrote:
> > > > > > There exist tilt switches that simply report their tilt-state via
> > > > > > some gpios.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The number and orientation of their axes can vary depending on
> > > > > > the switch used and the build of the device. Also two or more
> > > > > > one-axis switches could be combined to provide multi-dimensional
> > > > > > orientation.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > One example of a device using such a switch is the family of
> > > > > > Qisda ebook readers, where the switch provides information about
> > > > > > the landscape / portrait orientation of the device. The example
> > > > > > in Documentation/input/gpio-tilt.txt documents exactly this
> > > > > > one-axis device.
> > > > >
> > > > > Looks very nice, just a few comments below.
> > > >
> > > > thanks for your review, comments below
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > > +static void gpio_tilt_polled_poll(struct input_polled_dev *dev)
> > > > > > +{
> > > > > > + struct gpio_tilt_polled_dev *bdev = dev->private;
> > > > >
> > > > > Call it tdev or tilt or tilt_dev or something? bdev is not very
> > > > > fitting here.
> > > >
> > > > ok, will change this
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > > +static int __devinit gpio_tilt_polled_probe(struct
> > > > > > platform_device *pdev) +{
> > > > > > + struct gpio_tilt_platform_data *pdata =
> > > > > > pdev->dev.platform_data; + struct device *dev = &pdev->dev;
> > > > > > + struct gpio_tilt_polled_dev *bdev;
> > > > > > + struct input_polled_dev *poll_dev;
> > > > > > + struct input_dev *input;
> > > > > > + int error, i;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + if (!pdata || !pdata->poll_interval)
> > > > > > + return -EINVAL;
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + bdev = kzalloc(sizeof(struct gpio_tilt_polled_dev),
> > > > > > GFP_KERNEL); + if (!bdev) {
> > > > > > + dev_err(dev, "no memory for private data\n");
> > > > > > + return -ENOMEM;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > +
> > > > > > + bdev->gpios = kmemdup(pdata->gpios,
> > > > > > + pdata->nr_gpios * sizeof(struct gpio),
> > > > > > + GFP_KERNEL);
> > > > > > + if (bdev->gpios == NULL) {
> > > > > > + dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to allocate gpio data\n");
> > > > > > + error = -ENOMEM;
> > > > > > + goto err_free_bdev;
> > > > > > + }
> > > > > > + bdev->nr_gpios = pdata->nr_gpios;
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you actually need to do this? Can't you just store the pointer
> > > > > to the platform data and use it instead? Same goes for the rest of
> > > > > items you are cloning.
> > > >
> > > > As I understand it from previous patches, platform data should be
> > > > markable as initdata which means the kernel discards it after boot.
> > > > Therefore it cannot be
> > >
> > > Absolutely not. Consider what happens if your driver is a module and is
> > > loaded after boot is complete. Or you unload and reload it;
> > > platform_data has to stay there, it later must not be marked initdata
> > > and freed.
> >
> > I don't claim to grasp every bit the initdata routines do :-) . But I was
> > under the impression that allowing people to make it initdata if
> > necessary and not building stuff as modules was the correct way.
>
> Huh? Forcing non-modular build is "the correct way"?
>
> > Last time I submitted a regulator patch Mark Brown wrote:
> >
> > Monday 29 August 2011, 11:18:07 Mark Brown wrote
> > [...]
> >
> > > This also fixes the use of platform data after probe - platform data
> > > should be able to be marked as initdata which may mean that the kernel
> > > discards it after boot.
> >
> > The bq24022 driver in question can be build as a module.
>
> Quoting Russell King "That's totally buggered, and that's putting it
> kindly.":
>
> http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-input/msg16335.html
:-), still strange to see two differing opinions
But I will get rid of the cloned platform data.
Heiko
--
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
