Hi Pramod, Srini
On 09/04/2014 08:08 PM, Srinivas Kandagatla wrote:
Pramod,
sorry for delay in reply as I was travelling, still in Jet lag.
Signed-off-by: Pramod Gurav <pramod.gu...@smartplayin.com>
---
drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
index 5475374..9296845 100644
--- a/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
+++ b/drivers/pinctrl/pinctrl-st.c
@@ -1517,6 +1517,7 @@ static int st_gpiolib_register_bank(struct
st_pinctrl *info,
0, handle_simple_irq,
IRQ_TYPE_LEVEL_LOW);
if (err) {
+ gpiochip_remove(&bank->gpio_chip);
This change-set looks good.
IMO, you can send a patch for this change set.
Removing the gpiochip here looks good to me too.
dev_info(dev, "could not add irqchip\n");
return err;
}
@@ -1685,6 +1686,29 @@ static int st_pctl_probe(struct platform_device
*pdev)
return 0;
}
+static int st_pctl_remove(struct platform_device *pdev)
+{
Ideally this driver will not be removed, as other drivers depend on
this, even the serial.
so I see no big achievement in adding the remove functionality, as this
is going to be a dead code and would never be tested.
Agree too.
Thanks,
Maxime
--
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/
