Hi Stefan, On 1 March 2017 at 03:23, Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> wrote: > This patch adds the pre_os_remove boolean flag to device_remove() and > changes all calls to this function to provide the default value of > "false". This is in preparation for the driver specific pre-OS remove > support. > > Signed-off-by: Stefan Roese <s...@denx.de> > Cc: Simon Glass <s...@chromium.org> > --- > arch/x86/cpu/queensbay/tnc.c | 4 ++-- > cmd/cros_ec.c | 2 +- > cmd/sf.c | 2 +- > drivers/block/blk-uclass.c | 2 +- > drivers/block/sandbox.c | 2 +- > drivers/core/device-remove.c | 9 +++++---- > drivers/core/device.c | 2 +- > drivers/core/root.c | 2 +- > drivers/core/uclass.c | 2 +- > drivers/mmc/mmc-uclass.c | 2 +- > drivers/mtd/spi/sandbox.c | 2 +- > drivers/mtd/spi/sf-uclass.c | 2 +- > drivers/spi/spi-uclass.c | 4 ++-- > drivers/usb/emul/sandbox_hub.c | 2 +- > drivers/usb/host/usb-uclass.c | 4 ++-- > include/dm/device-internal.h | 5 +++-- > include/dm/device.h | 3 +++ > test/dm/bus.c | 8 ++++---- > test/dm/core.c | 16 ++++++++-------- > test/dm/eth.c | 2 +- > test/dm/spi.c | 2 +- > 21 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
I think adding a parameter to device_remove() makes sense, but how about using flags instead? The true/false meaning is not clear here and your comment in device.h doesn't really help. Also I think it is better to name it after the required function rather than state related to the caller. IOW instead of 'pre-os' use something like 'active_dma_only' or as a flag ONLY_REMOVE_ACTIVE_DMA. Do you think the presence of DMA should be a device flag? Regards, Simon _______________________________________________ U-Boot mailing list U-Boot@lists.denx.de http://lists.denx.de/listinfo/u-boot
