From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: linux@roeck-us.net (Guenter Roeck)
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2014 08:45:15 -0700
Subject: [PATCH 12/44] mfd: ab8500-sysctrl: Register with kernel poweroff
 handler
In-Reply-To: <20141009133355.GQ20647@lee--X1>
References: <1412659726-29957-1-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
 <1412659726-29957-13-git-send-email-linux@roeck-us.net>
 <20141007080048.GB25331@lee--X1>
 <20141009103656.GF17836@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
 <20141009104927.GN20647@lee--X1> <54368D16.40404@roeck-us.net>
 <20141009133355.GQ20647@lee--X1>
Message-ID: <20141009154515.GB31987@roeck-us.net>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 02:33:55PM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> 
> > On 10/09/2014 03:49 AM, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >On Thu, 09 Oct 2014, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:00:48AM +0100, Lee Jones wrote:
> > >>>On Mon, 06 Oct 2014, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> > >>>>--- a/drivers/mfd/ab8500-sysctrl.c
> > >>>>+++ b/drivers/mfd/ab8500-sysctrl.c
> > >>>>@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
> > >>>
> > >>>[...]
> > >>>
> > >>>>+static int ab8500_power_off(struct notifier_block *this, unsigned long unused1,
> > >>>>+			    void *unused2)
> > >>>>  {
> > >>>>  	sigset_t old;
> > >>>>  	sigset_t all;
> > >>>>@@ -34,11 +36,6 @@ static void ab8500_power_off(void)
> > >>>>  	struct power_supply *psy;
> > >>>>  	int ret;
> > >>>>
> > >>>>-	if (sysctrl_dev == NULL) {
> > >>>>-		pr_err("%s: sysctrl not initialized\n", __func__);
> > >>>>-		return;
> > >>>>-	}
> > >>>
> > >>>Can you explain the purpose of this change please?
> > >>
> > >>I guess it's because the sysctrl_dev is already initialised when
> > >>registering the power_off handler, so there isn't a way to call the
> > >>above function with a NULL sysctrl_dev. Probably even with the original
> > >>code you didn't need this check (after some race fix in
> > >>ab8500_sysctrl_remove but races is one of the things Guenter's patches
> > >>try to address).
> > >
> > >Sounds reasonable, although I think this change should be part of
> > >another patch.
> > >
> > Sure, no problem. I'll split this into two patches.
> > 
> > Since we are at it, any idea what to do with the restart function
> > in the same file ? It is not used anywhere.
> 
> You can strip it out with Linus Walleij's Ack.  Or I'll be happy to do
> it?
> 
I'll strip it out in a 3rd patch.

Guenter