| Message ID | 1392273624-22920-4-git-send-email-21cnbao@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:40:23PM +0800, Barry Song wrote: > From: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> > > In resume entry, use dev_get_drvdata() instead of to_platform_device(dev) + > platform_get_drvdata(pdev). > > Signed-off-by: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> > Signed-off-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com> > --- > drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c | 3 +-- > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > index 097c10a..8e45bf11 100644 > --- a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > +++ b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > @@ -157,8 +157,7 @@ static int sirfsoc_pwrc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP > static int sirfsoc_pwrc_resume(struct device *dev) > { > - struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); > - struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > + struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); I believe we should use accessors matching the object type. Currently dev_get_drvdata and platform_get_drvdata return the same object, but they do not have to. IOW I prefer the original code. Thanks.
2014-02-13 15:24 GMT+08:00 Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>: > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:40:23PM +0800, Barry Song wrote: >> From: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> >> >> In resume entry, use dev_get_drvdata() instead of to_platform_device(dev) + >> platform_get_drvdata(pdev). >> >> Signed-off-by: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> >> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com> >> --- >> drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c | 3 +-- >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c >> index 097c10a..8e45bf11 100644 >> --- a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c >> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c >> @@ -157,8 +157,7 @@ static int sirfsoc_pwrc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) >> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP >> static int sirfsoc_pwrc_resume(struct device *dev) >> { >> - struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); >> - struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); >> + struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > > I believe we should use accessors matching the object type. Currently > dev_get_drvdata and platform_get_drvdata return the same object, but > they do not have to. > > IOW I prefer the original code. i did see many commits in kernel which did same jobs with this one. e.g: https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a1216394e620d0dfbb03c712ae3210e7b77c9e11 https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bab8b563ef08455440badca7fe79b2c700bd1b75 ... in my understand, the changed context is a general pm_ops to general "driver" and not a legacy suspend/resume in "platform_driver" bound with pdev, so in the context, we are caring about "device" more than "pdev". how do you think if i do a more change in probe() with this by: - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwrcdrv); + dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, pwrcdrv); would this make everything look fine? > > Thanks. > > -- > Dmitry -barry -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 03:47:33PM +0800, Barry Song wrote: > 2014-02-13 15:24 GMT+08:00 Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>: > > On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 02:40:23PM +0800, Barry Song wrote: > >> From: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> > >> > >> In resume entry, use dev_get_drvdata() instead of to_platform_device(dev) + > >> platform_get_drvdata(pdev). > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Xianglong Du <Xianglong.Du@csr.com> > >> Signed-off-by: Barry Song <Baohua.Song@csr.com> > >> --- > >> drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c | 3 +-- > >> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > >> index 097c10a..8e45bf11 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > >> +++ b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c > >> @@ -157,8 +157,7 @@ static int sirfsoc_pwrc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) > >> #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP > >> static int sirfsoc_pwrc_resume(struct device *dev) > >> { > >> - struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); > >> - struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); > >> + struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); > > > > I believe we should use accessors matching the object type. Currently > > dev_get_drvdata and platform_get_drvdata return the same object, but > > they do not have to. > > > > IOW I prefer the original code. > > i did see many commits in kernel which did same jobs with this one. e.g: > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=a1216394e620d0dfbb03c712ae3210e7b77c9e11 > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=bab8b563ef08455440badca7fe79b2c700bd1b75 > ... > > in my understand, the changed context is a general pm_ops to general > "driver" and not a legacy suspend/resume in "platform_driver" bound > with pdev, so in the context, we are caring about "device" more than > "pdev". It is more about who owns the data - generic device or platform device? > > how do you think if i do a more change in probe() with this by: > > - platform_set_drvdata(pdev, pwrcdrv); > + dev_set_drvdata(&pdev->dev, pwrcdrv); > > would this make everything look fine? Yes, it would, since we would now know that it is generic driver layer that has ownership of this data item. Thanks.
diff --git a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c index 097c10a..8e45bf11 100644 --- a/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c +++ b/drivers/input/misc/sirfsoc-onkey.c @@ -157,8 +157,7 @@ static int sirfsoc_pwrc_remove(struct platform_device *pdev) #ifdef CONFIG_PM_SLEEP static int sirfsoc_pwrc_resume(struct device *dev) { - struct platform_device *pdev = to_platform_device(dev); - struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = platform_get_drvdata(pdev); + struct sirfsoc_pwrc_drvdata *pwrcdrv = dev_get_drvdata(dev); /* * Do not mask pwrc interrupt as we want pwrc work as a wakeup source