Thread (1 message) 1 message, 1 author, 2017-03-07

Re: [PATCH v3 06/16] tpm-chip: utilize new cdev_device_add helper function

From: Jarkko Sakkinen <hidden>
Date: 2017-03-07 08:31:39
Also in: linux-fsdevel, linux-gpio, linux-rdma, linux-rtc, linux-scsi, nvdimm

Possibly related (same subject, not in this thread)

On Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 06:31:38AM +0100, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 11:04:26PM +0200, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote:
quoted
On Mon, Mar 06, 2017 at 12:04:22AM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
quoted
Replace the open coded registration of the cdev and dev with the
new device_add_cdev() helper. The helper replaces a common pattern by
taking the proper reference against the parent device and adding both
the cdev and the device.

Signed-off-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang-OTvnGxWRz7hWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>
Reviewed-by: Jason Gunthorpe <jgunthorpe-ePGOBjL8dl3ta4EC/59zMFaTQe2KTcn/@public.gmane.org>
---
 drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c | 19 +++----------------
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
index c406343..935f0e9 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm-chip.c
@@ -187,7 +187,6 @@ struct tpm_chip *tpm_chip_alloc(struct device *pdev,
 
 	cdev_init(&chip->cdev, &tpm_fops);
 	chip->cdev.owner = THIS_MODULE;
-	chip->cdev.kobj.parent = &chip->dev.kobj;
 
 	return chip;
 
@@ -230,27 +229,16 @@ static int tpm_add_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 {
 	int rc;
 
-	rc = cdev_add(&chip->cdev, chip->dev.devt, 1);
+	rc = cdev_device_add(&chip->cdev, &chip->dev);
 	if (rc) {
 		dev_err(&chip->dev,
-			"unable to cdev_add() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n",
+			"unable to cdev_device_add() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n",
 			dev_name(&chip->dev), MAJOR(chip->dev.devt),
 			MINOR(chip->dev.devt), rc);
 
 		return rc;
 	}
 
-	rc = device_add(&chip->dev);
-	if (rc) {
-		dev_err(&chip->dev,
-			"unable to device_register() %s, major %d, minor %d, err=%d\n",
-			dev_name(&chip->dev), MAJOR(chip->dev.devt),
-			MINOR(chip->dev.devt), rc);
-
-		cdev_del(&chip->cdev);
-		return rc;
-	}
-
 	/* Make the chip available. */
 	mutex_lock(&idr_lock);
 	idr_replace(&dev_nums_idr, chip, chip->dev_num);
@@ -261,8 +249,7 @@ static int tpm_add_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 
 static void tpm_del_char_device(struct tpm_chip *chip)
 {
-	cdev_del(&chip->cdev);
-	device_del(&chip->dev);
+	cdev_device_del(&chip->cdev, &chip->dev);
 
 	/* Make the chip unavailable. */
 	mutex_lock(&idr_lock);
-- 
2.1.4
Reviewed-by: Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen-VuQAYsv1563Yd54FQh9/CA@public.gmane.org>

I cannot test this at this point as security tree does not include
the commit that is dependent on this. I'm also wondering if this
commit is even going through my tree to upstream?
I can take it all at once through my tree.

thanks,

greg k-h
Alright, thank you!

/Jarkko

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to "rtc-linux".
Membership options at http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux .
Please read http://groups.google.com/group/rtc-linux/web/checklist
before submitting a driver.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "rtc-linux" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rtc-linux+unsubscribe-/JYPxA39Uh5TLH3MbocFF+G/Ez6ZCGd0@public.gmane.org
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help