On Mon, 2021-02-15 at 12:43 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi,

On 2/15/21 12:31 PM, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org wrote:

quoted

On Mon, Feb 15, 2021 at 11:37:26AM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 2/15/21 8:22 AM, Vaittinen, Matti wrote:

quoted

On Sat, 2021-02-13 at 16:59 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

quoted

Hi,

On 2/13/21 4:27 PM, Guenter Roeck wrote:

quoted

On 2/13/21 7:03 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
[ ... ]

quoted

I think something like this should work:

static int devm_delayed_work_autocancel(struct device
*dev,
struct delayed_work *w,
					void (*worker)(struct
work_struct *work)) {
	INIT_DELAYED_WORK(w, worker);
	return devm_add_action(dev, (void (*action)(void
*))cancel_delayed_work_sync, w);
}

include/linux/devm-cleanup-helpers.h

And put everything (including kdoc texts) there.

This way the functionality is 100% opt-in (by explicitly
including
the header if you want the helpers) which hopefully makes this a
bit more acceptable to people who don't like this style of
cleanups.

I would be even happy to act as the upstream maintainer for such
a
include/linux/devm-cleanup-helpers.h file, I can maintain it as
part
of the platform-drivers-x86 tree (with its own MAINTAINERS
entry).

Greg, would this be an acceptable solution to you ?

I don't know, sorry, let's revisit this after 5.12-rc1 is out, with
a
patch set that I can review again, and we can go from there as I
can't
do anything until then...

Ok.

This is Ok for me too. I am in no hurry with this - I've already a few
things to work on.
So, I will rework this to be in a single header when v5.12-rc1 is out.

Best Regards
	Matti Vaittinen


--
Matti Vaittinen, Linux device drivers
ROHM Semiconductors, Finland
SWDC
Kiviharjunlenkki 1E
90220 OULU
FINLAND

~~~ "I don't think so," said Rene Descartes. Just then he vanished ~~~

Simon says - in Latin please.
"non cogito me" dixit Rene Descarte, deinde evanescavit

(Thanks for the translation Simon)