On 6/29/2023 10:54 PM, Dan Williams wrote:
> Michal Wilczynski wrote:
>> Currently logic for installing notifications from ACPI devices is
>> implemented using notify callback in struct acpi_driver. Preparations
>> are being made to replace acpi_driver with more generic struct
>> platform_driver, which doesn't contain notify callback. Furthermore
>> as of now handlers are being called indirectly through
>> acpi_notify_device(), which decreases performance.
>>
>> Call acpi_dev_install_notify_handler() at the end of .add() callback.
>> Call acpi_dev_remove_notify_handler() at the beginning of .remove()
>> callback. Change arguments passed to the notify function to match with
>> what's required by acpi_install_notify_handler(). Remove .notify
>> callback initialization in acpi_driver.
>>
>> Suggested-by: Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael.j.wyso...@intel.com>
>> Signed-off-by: Michal Wilczynski <michal.wilczyn...@intel.com>
>> ---
>>  drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++------
>>  1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
>> index 95930e9d776c..a281bdfee8a0 100644
>> --- a/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
>> +++ b/drivers/acpi/nfit/core.c
>> @@ -3312,11 +3312,13 @@ void acpi_nfit_shutdown(void *data)
>>  }
>>  EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(acpi_nfit_shutdown);
>>  
>> -static void acpi_nfit_notify(struct acpi_device *adev, u32 event)
>> +static void acpi_nfit_notify(acpi_handle handle, u32 event, void *data)
>>  {
>> -    device_lock(&adev->dev);
>> -    __acpi_nfit_notify(&adev->dev, adev->handle, event);
>> -    device_unlock(&adev->dev);
>> +    struct acpi_device *device = data;
>> +
>> +    device_lock(&device->dev);
>> +    __acpi_nfit_notify(&device->dev, handle, event);
>> +    device_unlock(&device->dev);
>>  }
>>  
>>  static int acpi_nfit_add(struct acpi_device *adev)
>> @@ -3375,12 +3377,23 @@ static int acpi_nfit_add(struct acpi_device *adev)
>>  
>>      if (rc)
>>              return rc;
>> -    return devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, acpi_nfit_shutdown, acpi_desc);
>> +
>> +    rc = devm_add_action_or_reset(dev, acpi_nfit_shutdown, acpi_desc);
>> +    if (rc)
>> +            return rc;
>> +
>> +    return acpi_dev_install_notify_handler(adev,
>> +                                           ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
>> +                                           acpi_nfit_notify);
>>  }
>>  
>>  static void acpi_nfit_remove(struct acpi_device *adev)
>>  {
>>      /* see acpi_nfit_unregister */
>> +
>> +    acpi_dev_remove_notify_handler(adev,
>> +                                   ACPI_DEVICE_NOTIFY,
>> +                                   acpi_nfit_notify);
> Please use devm to trigger this release rather than making
> acpi_nfit_remove() contain any logic.

I think adding separate devm action to remove event handler is not
necessary. I'll put the removal in the beggining of acpi_nfit_shutdown() if you
don't object.

>
> An additional cleanup opportunity with the ->add() path fully devm
> instrumented would be to just delete acpi_nfit_remove() since it is
> optional and serves no purpose.

Will do,

Thanks !



Reply via email to