From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Sean Wang Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 09/16] rtc: mediatek: convert to use device managed functions Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2018 12:07:45 +0800 Message-ID: <1522037265.18424.14.camel@mtkswgap22> References: <20180323105017.GI3417@piout.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20180323105017.GI3417@piout.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Alexandre Belloni Cc: robh+dt@kernel.org, mark.rutland@arm.com, sre@kernel.org, lee.jones@linaro.org, a.zummo@towertech.it, eddie.huang@mediatek.com, devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-rtc@vger.kernel.org, linux-pm@vger.kernel.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-pm@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 11:50 +0100, Alexandre Belloni wrote: > On 23/03/2018 at 17:15:06 +0800, sean.wang@mediatek.com wrote: > > From: Sean Wang > > > > Use device managed operation to simplify error handling, reduce source > > code size, and reduce the likelyhood of bugs, and remove our removal > > callback which contains anything already done by device managed functions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Sean Wang > > --- > > drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c | 31 ++++++++----------------------- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > index cefb83b..bfc5d6f 100644 > > --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-mt6397.c > > @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ > > > > #include > > #include > > +#include > > #include > > #include > > #include > > @@ -328,10 +329,10 @@ static int mtk_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > platform_set_drvdata(pdev, rtc); > > > > - ret = request_threaded_irq(rtc->irq, NULL, > > - mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread, > > - IRQF_ONESHOT | IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH, > > - "mt6397-rtc", rtc); > > + ret = devm_request_threaded_irq(&pdev->dev, rtc->irq, NULL, > > + mtk_rtc_irq_handler_thread, > > + IRQF_ONESHOT | IRQF_TRIGGER_HIGH, > > + "mt6397-rtc", rtc); > > if (ret) { > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "Failed to request alarm IRQ: %d: %d\n", > > rtc->irq, ret); > > @@ -340,30 +341,15 @@ static int mtk_rtc_probe(struct platform_device *pdev) > > > > device_init_wakeup(&pdev->dev, 1); > > > > - rtc->rtc_dev = rtc_device_register("mt6397-rtc", &pdev->dev, > > - &mtk_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE); > > + rtc->rtc_dev = devm_rtc_device_register(&pdev->dev, "mt6397-rtc", > > + &mtk_rtc_ops, THIS_MODULE); > > You should probably switch to devm_rtc_allocate_device() and > rtc_register_device instead of devm_rtc_device_register. > Just would like to know something details It seems you just encourage me to switch into the new registration method and currently devm_rtc_device_register I used for the driver shouldn't cause any harm. right? > > if (IS_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev)) { > > dev_err(&pdev->dev, "register rtc device failed\n"); > > ret = PTR_ERR(rtc->rtc_dev); > > - goto out_free_irq; > > + return ret; > > ret doesn't seem necessary anymore here. okay, it'll be removed > >