Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751511AbdCZPjq (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:39:46 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f170.google.com ([209.85.128.170]:35054 "EHLO mail-wr0-f170.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751468AbdCZPjo (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Mar 2017 11:39:44 -0400 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 23:38:55 +0800 From: Leo Yan To: Alexandre Belloni Cc: Russell King , Dmitry Torokhov , Alessandro Zummo , Linus Walleij , Baptiste Reynal , Alex Williamson , Jaroslav Kysela , Takashi Iwai , linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, alsa-devel@alsa-project.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] Convert to use devm_*() for amba attached modules Message-ID: <20170326153855.GA14404@leoy-linaro> References: <1490539314-9681-1-git-send-email-leo.yan@linaro.org> <20170326152050.v47z36eud6xvrcpt@piout.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170326152050.v47z36eud6xvrcpt@piout.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1358 Lines: 31 On Sun, Mar 26, 2017 at 05:20:50PM +0200, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 26/03/2017 at 22:41:49 +0800, Leo Yan wrote: > > When review device driver modules which attach to amba bus, found > > several modules are not using devm_*() apis to manage resource. As > > result, some drivers have memory leakage or missing iomem unmapping > > when rmmod module. And the code has many "goto" tags to handle > > different failures. > > > > So this patch series is to convert to use devm_*() for moudules which > > are attached to amba bus to manage resource and get more robust and > > neat code. > > > > Patch 0003 "drivers/rtc/rtc-pl031.c: Convert to use devm_*()" has been > > verified on 96boards Hikey. Other patches can pass building but have > > not really tested on hardware. > > > > If your plan is to actually remove usage of > amba_request_regions() and amba_release_regions(), you should do so in > its own patch sets instead of hiding that in a useless cleanup series. Just curious, from Russell's replying for patch 0005, IIUC we cannot totally remove usage of amba_request_regions() and amba_release_regions(), there have some coner case should use amba_request_regions() + ioremap(). Does it make sense to remove most usage of amba_request_regions() and amba_release_regions() but we still keep these two functions in the kernel? Thanks, Leo Yan