Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 3/7] dmaengine: st_fdma: Add STMicroelectronics FDMA engine driver support | From | Maxime Coquelin <> | Date | Mon, 31 Aug 2015 10:44:40 +0200 |
| |
On 08/31/2015 10:08 AM, Paul Bolle wrote: > Hi Maxime, > > On ma, 2015-08-31 at 09:49 +0200, Maxime Coquelin wrote: >> On 07/09/2015 10:17 AM, Paul Bolle wrote: >>>>> +static int __exit st_fdma_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >>>>> +{ >>>>> + struct st_fdma_dev *fdev = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >>>>> + >>>>> + wait_for_completion(&fdev->fw_ack); >>>>> + >>>>> + st_fdma_clk_disable(fdev); >>>>> + >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> +} >>> Since this driver is built-in only this means st_fdma_remove() can >>> never be used, right? >> It's not because a driver is built-in only that it does not need a >> remove callback. >> An instance can be probed/removed any time via driver's bind/unbind >> SysFS entries. >> Am I missing something? > (This discussion is moot because Peter already stated that a new version > will be modular.) > > It follows from the __exit tag that st_fdma_remove() should never be > part of the kernel image (in this version of the patch), doesn't it? Yes, you are right. The remove callback is relevant, but without the __exit tag. > > (I don't know what happens in this situation if an unbind sysfs entry is > used to remove a driver. I've never tried that.) > > Not checked whether the function is omitted when built-in, but in any case, I thnk remove callbacks should not be tagged with __exit.
Regards, Maxime
| |