lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    SubjectRe: [BUGFIX 3/9] ACPI, DOCK: clean up unused module related code
    Date
    On Friday, June 14, 2013 10:04:01 PM Jiang Liu wrote:
    > On 06/14/2013 02:26 AM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
    > > On Friday, June 14, 2013 12:32:26 AM Jiang Liu wrote:
    > >> ACPI dock driver can't be built as a module any more, so clean up
    > >> module related code.
    > >>
    > >> Signed-off-by: Jiang Liu <jiang.liu@huawei.com>
    > >> Cc: Shaohua Li <shaohua.li@intel.com>
    > >> Cc: Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>
    > >> Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@sisk.pl>
    > >> Cc: linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org
    > >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
    > >
    > > How exactly does this depend on [2/9]? If it doesn't at all, it should go
    > > after [1/9].
    > >
    > >> ---
    > >> drivers/acpi/dock.c | 41 -----------------------------------------
    > >> 1 file changed, 41 deletions(-)
    > >>
    > >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/dock.c b/drivers/acpi/dock.c
    > >> index 79c8d9e..50e38b7 100644
    > >> --- a/drivers/acpi/dock.c
    > >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/dock.c
    > >> @@ -53,12 +53,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(immediate_undock, "1 (default) will cause the driver to "
    > >>
    > >> static struct atomic_notifier_head dock_notifier_list;
    > >>
    > >> -static const struct acpi_device_id dock_device_ids[] = {
    > >> - {"LNXDOCK", 0},
    > >> - {"", 0},
    > >> -};
    > >> -MODULE_DEVICE_TABLE(acpi, dock_device_ids);
    > >> -
    > >
    > > Don't we actually need the device IDs?
    > Now dock driver could only be built as built-in, and it doesn't really
    > bind to ACPI dock devices, so I think the device ids are not used any
    > more. Not sure whether any userspace tool has dependency on the device
    > IDs.

    I see. OK

    Thanks,
    Rafael


    > >
    > >> struct dock_station {
    > >> acpi_handle handle;
    > >> unsigned long last_dock_time;
    > >> @@ -1013,30 +1007,6 @@ err_unregister:
    > >> }
    > >>
    > >> /**
    > >> - * dock_remove - free up resources related to the dock station
    > >> - */
    > >> -static int dock_remove(struct dock_station *ds)
    > >> -{
    > >> - struct dock_dependent_device *dd, *tmp;
    > >> - struct platform_device *dock_device = ds->dock_device;
    > >> -
    > >> - if (!dock_station_count)
    > >> - return 0;
    > >> -
    > >> - /* remove dependent devices */
    > >> - list_for_each_entry_safe(dd, tmp, &ds->dependent_devices, list)
    > >> - kfree(dd);
    > >> -
    > >> - list_del(&ds->sibling);
    > >> -
    > >> - /* cleanup sysfs */
    > >> - sysfs_remove_group(&dock_device->dev.kobj, &dock_attribute_group);
    > >> - platform_device_unregister(dock_device);
    > >> -
    > >> - return 0;
    > >> -}
    > >> -
    > >> -/**
    > >> * find_dock_and_bay - look for dock stations and bays
    > >> * @handle: acpi handle of a device
    > >> * @lvl: unused
    > >> @@ -1073,14 +1043,3 @@ int __init acpi_dock_init(void)
    > >> ACPI_DOCK_DRIVER_DESCRIPTION, dock_station_count);
    > >> return 0;
    > >> }
    > >> -
    > >> -static void __exit dock_exit(void)
    > >> -{
    > >> - struct dock_station *tmp, *dock_station;
    > >> -
    > >> - unregister_acpi_bus_notifier(&dock_acpi_notifier);
    > >> - list_for_each_entry_safe(dock_station, tmp, &dock_stations, sibling)
    > >> - dock_remove(dock_station);
    > >> -}
    > >> -
    > >> -module_exit(dock_exit);
    > >
    > > The other changes look OK to me.
    > Thanks for review.
    >
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > > Rafael
    > >
    > >
    >
    --
    I speak only for myself.
    Rafael J. Wysocki, Intel Open Source Technology Center.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2013-06-14 16:21    [W:2.803 / U:1.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site