lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Aug]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/7] dmaengine: st_fdma: Add STMicroelectronics FDMA engine driver support
From
Date


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




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-08-31 11:01    [W:0.073 / U:0.576 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site