On Thu, Mar 10, 2016 at 09:16:36AM +0900, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: > On 10.03.2016 06:35, Eduardo Valentin wrote: > > This changes the driver to use the devm_ version > > of thermal_zone_of_sensor_register and cleans > > up the local points and unregister calls. > > > > Cc: Lukasz Majewski <[email protected]> > > Cc: Zhang Rui <[email protected]> > > Cc: Kukjin Kim <[email protected]> > > Cc: Krzysztof Kozlowski <[email protected]> > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Cc: [email protected] > > Signed-off-by: Eduardo Valentin <[email protected]> > > --- > > drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c | 12 ++++-------- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > > b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > > index fa61eff..256039e 100644 > > --- a/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > > +++ b/drivers/thermal/samsung/exynos_tmu.c > > @@ -1363,8 +1363,8 @@ static int exynos_tmu_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > * data->tzd must be registered before calling exynos_tmu_initialize(), > > * requesting irq and calling exynos_tmu_control(). > > */ > > - data->tzd = thermal_zone_of_sensor_register(&pdev->dev, 0, data, > > - &exynos_sensor_ops); > > + data->tzd = devm_thermal_zone_of_sensor_register(&pdev->dev, 0, data, > > + &exynos_sensor_ops); > > if (IS_ERR(data->tzd)) { > > ret = PTR_ERR(data->tzd); > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to register sensor: %d\n", ret); > > @@ -1374,21 +1374,19 @@ static int exynos_tmu_probe(struct platform_device > > *pdev) > > ret = exynos_tmu_initialize(pdev); > > if (ret) { > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to initialize TMU\n"); > > - goto err_thermal; > > + goto err_sclk; > > } > > > > ret = devm_request_irq(&pdev->dev, data->irq, exynos_tmu_irq, > > IRQF_TRIGGER_RISING | IRQF_SHARED, dev_name(&pdev->dev), data); > > if (ret) { > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to request irq: %d\n", data->irq); > > - goto err_thermal; > > + goto err_sclk; > > } > > > > exynos_tmu_control(pdev, true); > > return 0; > > > > -err_thermal: > > - thermal_zone_of_sensor_unregister(&pdev->dev, data->tzd); > > err_sclk: > > clk_disable_unprepare(data->sclk); > > err_clk: > > @@ -1406,9 +1404,7 @@ err_sensor: > > static int exynos_tmu_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > > { > > struct exynos_tmu_data *data = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > > - struct thermal_zone_device *tzd = data->tzd; > > > > - thermal_zone_of_sensor_unregister(&pdev->dev, tzd); > > Before, the sensor was removed from zone (ops like get_temp NULL-ified > etc), then we stopped TMU, disabled clocks, disabled regulator and > finally freed IRQ (through devm-like interface). > > Now this will be different - first stop of TMU, disable clocks, disable, > regulator, remove sensor from zone (through devm) and finally free IRQ. > > Are you sure that changing order is okay?
Not really. After checking the driver code and your suggestions, I don't think this driver would benefit of this change, not at least the way it is currently. Thanks for pointing out. I am taking this driver out of the series. > > Best regards, > Krzysztof > > > exynos_tmu_control(pdev, false); > > > > clk_disable_unprepare(data->sclk); > > >
