Hello, Dmitry.
On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:37:01PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Not all drivers use devres for rest of their resources so it makes sense
> to have unmanaged versions (like we have request_irq/devm_request_irq).
> Besides:
>
> [dtor@dtor-ws vmci]$ grep -r input_allocate_device dr
On Wednesday, October 31, 2012 02:05:32 PM Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello, Dmitry.
>
> On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:35:14PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> > There is a demand from driver's writers to use managed devices framework
> > for their drivers. Unfortunately up to this moment input devices did no
Hello, Dmitry.
On Mon, Oct 22, 2012 at 10:35:14PM -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> There is a demand from driver's writers to use managed devices framework
> for their drivers. Unfortunately up to this moment input devices did not
> provide support for managed devices and that lead to mixing two st
On Monday, October 29, 2012 10:32:54 PM Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> > > Either way, the code looks functional to me.
> >
> > So is that "reviewed-by"?
>
> I was thinking about this hunk:
> > @@ -1972,7 +2084,20 @@ int input_register_device(struct input_dev *dev)
> >
> > mutex_unlock(&input_m
> > Either way, the code looks functional to me.
>
> So is that "reviewed-by"?
I was thinking about this hunk:
> @@ -1972,7 +2084,20 @@ int input_register_device(struct input_dev *dev)
>
> mutex_unlock(&input_mutex);
>
> + if (dev->devres_managed) {
> + dev_info(dev
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 09:02:26PM +0100, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> > > > @@ -1766,8 +1830,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(input_allocate_device);
> > > > */
> > > > void input_free_device(struct input_dev *dev)
> > > > {
> > > > - if (dev)
> > > > + if (dev) {
> > > > + if (dev->de
> > > @@ -1766,8 +1830,14 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(input_allocate_device);
> > > */
> > > void input_free_device(struct input_dev *dev)
> > > {
> > > - if (dev)
> > > + if (dev) {
> > > + if (dev->devres_managed)
> > > + WARN_ON(devres_destroy(dev->dev.parent,
> > > +
Hi Henrik,
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 07:22:53PM +0100, Henrik Rydberg wrote:
> Hi Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
>
> > There is a demand from driver's writers to use managed devices framework
> > for their drivers. Unfortunately up to this moment input devices did not
> > provide support for managed device
Hi Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> There is a demand from driver's writers to use managed devices framework
> for their drivers. Unfortunately up to this moment input devices did not
> provide support for managed devices and that lead to mixing two styles
> of resource management which usually introduced
There is a demand from driver's writers to use managed devices framework
for their drivers. Unfortunately up to this moment input devices did not
provide support for managed devices and that lead to mixing two styles
of resource management which usually introduced more bugs, such as
manually unregi
10 matches
Mail list logo
