e800_tg_change depends on w100fb_gpio_read/write API which is only present
if w100fb is compiled in kernel.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: Ian Molton <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-pxa/eseries.c | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
a bit of explanation would be nice here. Something like:
Subject: i2c-pxa: make sure the remove callback is called on unbind
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded after boot or module
load time. Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
This way everyone can understand that a real bug is fixed here.
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
Hello Dmitry,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 05:05:10AM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
quoted hunk
e800_tg_change depends on w100fb_gpio_read/write API which is only present
if w100fb is compiled in kernel.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: Ian Molton <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-pxa/eseries.c | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
What happens if FB_W100=m? The code isn't compiled in, would it still
be necessary?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
From: Ben Dooks <hidden> Date: 2011-01-05 09:19:15
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:24:45AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
a bit of explanation would be nice here. Something like:
Subject: i2c-pxa: make sure the remove callback is called on unbind
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded after boot or module
load time. Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
This way everyone can understand that a real bug is fixed here.
agreed, please re-submit
--
Ben Dooks, ben at fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/ben/
Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.
Hello again,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:27:49AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
Hello Dmitry,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 05:05:10AM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
quoted
e800_tg_change depends on w100fb_gpio_read/write API which is only present
if w100fb is compiled in kernel.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: Ian Molton <redacted>
---
arch/arm/mach-pxa/eseries.c | 2 ++
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
Hello again,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:27:49AM +0100, Uwe Kleine-K?nig wrote:
quoted
Hello Dmitry,
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 05:05:10AM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
quoted
e800_tg_change depends on w100fb_gpio_read/write API which is only present
if w100fb is compiled in kernel.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: Ian Molton <redacted>
---
?arch/arm/mach-pxa/eseries.c | ? ?2 ++
?1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
From: Ben Dooks <hidden> Date: 2011-01-05 12:17:31
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 05:05:05AM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
Please write a reasonable commit message, a null or almost empty commit
message is simply unnaceptable. Please see the Documentation/SubmittingPatches
or ask more about how to write good commit messages.
Also, see Uwe's reply for a good example of how to write a commit message.
quoted hunk
-static int __exit i2c_pxa_remove(struct platform_device *dev)
+static int __devexit i2c_pxa_remove(struct platform_device *dev)
{
struct pxa_i2c *i2c = platform_get_drvdata(dev);
Right, I think this should fix any hotplug problems that you have.
--
Ben Dooks, ben at fluff.org, http://www.fluff.org/ben/
Large Hadron Colada: A large Pina Colada that makes the universe disappear.
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded when linking the
kernel. Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a clean unbind/rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded when linking the
kernel. Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a clean unbind/rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Cc: linux-i2c at vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ben Dooks <ben-linux@fluff.org>
---
drivers/i2c/busses/i2c-pxa.c | 4 ++--
1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 07:06:44PM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded when linking the
kernel. Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a clean unbind/rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Hello, all
2011/1/8 Uwe Kleine-K?nig [off-list ref]:
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 07:06:44PM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
quoted
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded when linking the
kernel. ?Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a clean unbind/rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-K?nig <redacted>
I see this patch is still not pushed to neither linus nor linux-next.
Should I put it into rmk's patch system? Or will it find it's way to main kernel
via other paths?
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 04:59:28PM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
Hello, all
2011/1/8 Uwe Kleine-K?nig [off-list ref]:
quoted
On Sat, Jan 08, 2011 at 07:06:44PM +0300, Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov wrote:
quoted
When a "pxa2xx-i2c" device was unbound (e.g. via sysfs) the remove
callback was not called because it was discarded when linking the
kernel. ?Because of that the resources allocated in probe were not
freed and so a clean unbind/rebind was impossible.
Fix that by moving the remove callback to .devexit.text.
Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <redacted>
Acked-by: Uwe Kleine-K?nig <redacted>
I see this patch is still not pushed to neither linus nor linux-next.
Should I put it into rmk's patch system? Or will it find it's way to main kernel
via other paths?
rmk's patch system isn't the right place. Ben needs to take it. Ben?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-K?nig |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |