On Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:58:11 +0200
, Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.riba...@gmail.com>
 wrote:
> platform_device_del only checks the type of the resource in order to
> call release_resource.
> 
> On the other hand, platform_device_add calls insert_resource for any
> resource that has a parent.
> 
> Make both code branches balanced.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ricardo Ribalda Delgado <ricardo.riba...@gmail.com>
> ---
>  drivers/base/platform.c | 10 +++++++---
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/base/platform.c b/drivers/base/platform.c
> index ebf034b..6028681 100644
> --- a/drivers/base/platform.c
> +++ b/drivers/base/platform.c
> @@ -341,19 +341,23 @@ int platform_device_add(struct platform_device *pdev)
>  
>       for (i = 0; i < pdev->num_resources; i++) {
>               struct resource *p, *r = &pdev->resource[i];
> +             unsigned long type = resource_type(r);
>  
>               if (r->name == NULL)
>                       r->name = dev_name(&pdev->dev);
>  
> +             if (!(type == IORESOURCE_MEM || type == IORESOURCE_IO))
> +                     continue;
> +
>               p = r->parent;
>               if (!p) {
> -                     if (resource_type(r) == IORESOURCE_MEM)
> +                     if (type == IORESOURCE_MEM)
>                               p = &iomem_resource;
> -                     else if (resource_type(r) == IORESOURCE_IO)
> +                     else if (type == IORESOURCE_IO)
>                               p = &ioport_resource;
>               }
>  
> -             if (p && insert_resource(p, r)) {
> +             if (insert_resource(p, r)) {
>                       dev_err(&pdev->dev, "failed to claim resource %d\n", i);
>                       ret = -EBUSY;
>                       goto failed;

This patch is correct in that it makes things balanced, but I don't
think it is the right behaviour. I've just posted a patch that does it
the other way around, based on a patch that Pantelis posted doing the
same thing, but without refactoring at the same time.

Instead of filtering out the non-MEM/IO resources, the new code checks
the parent pointer on removal, because that is the safe test of if a
resource has been registered in the first place.

g.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to