drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
The 'input_dev' is a managed resource allocated with
devm_input_allocate_device(), so there is no need to call
input_unregister_device() explicitly. It will be called automatically
when the driver is removed.
Fixes: 4c92d448e3e6 ("platform/x86/amd/pmf: Use existing input event codes to update system states")
Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr>
---
Compile tested-only
I'm not 100% confident with this change. The error handling scheme is not
a clear to me as what I usually see. For example, the last calls from
amd_pmf_probe() don't handle error at all. So the probe just succeeds in
these cases.
So, because of it, it is maybe fine to call input_unregister_device() in
amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(), even if it looks strange to me.
Review with care!
---
drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 3 ---
1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
index e246367aacee..cc721fbc3e0b 100644
--- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
+++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c
@@ -515,9 +515,6 @@ int amd_pmf_init_smart_pc(struct amd_pmf_dev *dev)
void amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(struct amd_pmf_dev *dev)
{
- if (dev->pmf_idev)
- input_unregister_device(dev->pmf_idev);
-
if (pb_side_load && dev->esbin)
amd_pmf_remove_pb(dev);
--
2.45.2
Le 25/07/2024 à 23:13, Christophe JAILLET a écrit : > The 'input_dev' is a managed resource allocated with > devm_input_allocate_device(), so there is no need to call > input_unregister_device() explicitly. It will be called automatically > when the driver is removed. > > Fixes: 4c92d448e3e6 ("platform/x86/amd/pmf: Use existing input event codes to update system states") > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@wanadoo.fr> > --- > Compile tested-only > > I'm not 100% confident with this change. The error handling scheme is not > a clear to me as what I usually see. For example, the last calls from > amd_pmf_probe() don't handle error at all. So the probe just succeeds in > these cases. > > So, because of it, it is maybe fine to call input_unregister_device() in > amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(), even if it looks strange to me. > > Review with care! NACK. Things have been explained to me in another similar patch proposal. Sorry for the noise. CJ > --- > drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c | 3 --- > 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > index e246367aacee..cc721fbc3e0b 100644 > --- a/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > +++ b/drivers/platform/x86/amd/pmf/tee-if.c > @@ -515,9 +515,6 @@ int amd_pmf_init_smart_pc(struct amd_pmf_dev *dev) > > void amd_pmf_deinit_smart_pc(struct amd_pmf_dev *dev) > { > - if (dev->pmf_idev) > - input_unregister_device(dev->pmf_idev); > - > if (pb_side_load && dev->esbin) > amd_pmf_remove_pb(dev); >
© 2016 - 2024 Red Hat, Inc.