Hi,

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 09:27:49AM -0500, Sven Van Asbroeck wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 3:27 AM Dmitry Torokhov
> <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Are there many more instances of this?
> 
> Unfortunately I think so.
> A simple grep brings up a couple of candidates, but I'm sure there are more:
> 
> drivers/regulator/arizona-micsupp.c
> drivers/nfc/port100.c
> drivers/power/supply/max14656_charger_detector.c
> drivers/phy/broadcom/phy-bcm-ns2-usbdrd.c
> 
> > I am unsure if we need
> > devm_init_work() when we can easily do the same in remove() call.
> 
> The devm_init_work() suggestion only addresses the problem for those modules
> that use devm_. The others will need fixes in remove(). But this is not as
> elegant and error-proof as using devm_init_work().
> 
> [...]

I would for sure appreciate a devm_init_work(). There are a lot of
devm_ users in power-supply and this helper would definitely
simplify things.

-- Sebastian