Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] drm: meson: rename driver name to meson-drm | From | Neil Armstrong <> | Date | Thu, 2 Feb 2017 11:50:59 +0100 |
| |
On 02/02/2017 11:45 AM, Daniel Vetter wrote: > On Thu, Feb 02, 2017 at 10:47:44AM +0100, Neil Armstrong wrote: >> The platform driver name is currently "meson" which can lead to some >> confusion, this patch renames it to "meson-drm" and removes the owner >> attribute. >> >> Signed-off-by: Neil Armstrong <narmstrong@baylibre.com> >> --- >> drivers/gpu/drm/meson/meson_drv.c | 3 +-- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/meson/meson_drv.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/meson/meson_drv.c >> index ff1f601..380bde7 100644 >> --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/meson/meson_drv.c >> +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/meson/meson_drv.c >> @@ -329,8 +329,7 @@ static int meson_drv_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> .probe = meson_drv_probe, >> .remove = meson_drv_remove, >> .driver = { >> - .owner = THIS_MODULE,
Hi Daniel,
> I don't get why you remove this, generally that will lead to trouble of > being able to unload code that's still in use ...
Indeed, but since a (long ?) time, the owner field is now populated by the platform_driver_register() core code.
> > Otherwise ack. > > Now, do you want to get this landed as part of the small drivers in > drm-mis experiment?
I have a PR ready, but it can go through this experiment, yes.
> -Daniel > >> - .name = DRIVER_NAME, >> + .name = "meson-drm", >> .of_match_table = dt_match, >> }, >> }; >> --
Thanks, Neil
| |