Re: [PATCH] pinctrl: st: Add remove function and remove gpio_chip on failure

[Maxime Coquelin]

Hi Pramod, Srini

On 09/04/2014 08:08 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
> Pramod,
> sorry for delay in reply as I was travelling, still in Jet lag.
> > Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gurav@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >   drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c |   25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > index 5475374..9296845 100644
> > --- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > +++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
> > @@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static int st_gpiolib_register_bank(struct
> > st_pinctrl *info,
> >                          0, handle_simple_irq,
> >                          IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
> >           if (err) {
> > +            gpiochip_remove(&bank->gpio_chip);
> This change-set looks good.
> IMO, you can send a patch for this change set.

Removing the gpiochip here looks good to me too.

> >               dev_info(dev, "could not add irqchip\n");
> >               return err;
> >           }
> > @@ -1685,6 +1686,29 @@ static int st_pctl_probe(struct platform_device
> > *pdev)
> >       return 0;
> >   }
>
> > +static int st_pctl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
> > +{
> Ideally this driver will not be removed, as other drivers depend on
> this, even the serial.
>
> so I see no big achievement in adding the remove functionality, as this
> is going to be a dead code and would never be tested.

Agree too.

Thanks,
Maxime
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/