Re: [PATCH 3/5] gpio: ath79: Make the driver removable
From: Alexandre Courbot <hidden>
Date: 2016-02-08 03:04:53
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 4:44 AM, Alban Bedel [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
As we now allow the driver to be built as a module it should be removable. Signed-off-by: Alban Bedel <albeu@free.fr> --- drivers/gpio/gpio-ath79.c | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)diff --git a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ath79.c b/drivers/gpio/gpio-ath79.c index afb535e..6b15792 100644 --- a/drivers/gpio/gpio-ath79.c +++ b/drivers/gpio/gpio-ath79.c@@ -46,6 +46,7 @@ static int ath79_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) ctrl = devm_kzalloc(&pdev->dev, sizeof(*ctrl), GFP_KERNEL); if (!ctrl) return -ENOMEM; + platform_set_drvdata(pdev, ctrl); if (np) { err = of_property_read_u32(np, "ngpios", &ath79_gpio_count);@@ -97,12 +98,21 @@ static int ath79_gpio_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) return 0; } +static int ath79_gpio_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) +{ + struct ath79_gpio_ctrl *ctrl = platform_get_drvdata(pdev);
platform_get_drvdata will return a gpio_chip *. I agree the address will be the same, but for correctness you should use the expected type. Especially since you will not use a member of ath79_gpio_ctrl in this function anyway.
+ + gpiochip_remove(&ctrl->gc); + return 0; +}
I suspect this removal pattern to be quite common, maybe we should just export bgpio_pdev_remove() to allow other drivers to use it instead of rewriting their own version?