Messages in this thread | | | From | Andy Shevchenko <> | Date | Wed, 16 Jun 2021 17:57:47 +0300 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] pps: generators: pps_gen_parport: Switch to use module_parport_driver() |
| |
+Cc: Alexander (I believe he is the author of the original code, sorry if not)
On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 5:47 PM Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 05:31:21PM +0300, Andy Shevchenko wrote: > > Switch to use module_parport_driver() to reduce boilerplate code. > > > > Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com> > > --- > > drivers/pps/generators/pps_gen_parport.c | 44 +++++------------------- > > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pps/generators/pps_gen_parport.c b/drivers/pps/generators/pps_gen_parport.c > > index 6a1af7664f3b..565f99782402 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pps/generators/pps_gen_parport.c > > +++ b/drivers/pps/generators/pps_gen_parport.c > > @@ -20,8 +20,6 @@ > > #include <linux/hrtimer.h> > > #include <linux/parport.h> > > > > -#define DRVDESC "parallel port PPS signal generator" > > - > > #define SIGNAL 0 > > #define NO_SIGNAL PARPORT_CONTROL_STROBE > > > > @@ -180,6 +178,11 @@ static void parport_attach(struct parport *port) > > { > > struct pardev_cb pps_cb; > > > > + if (send_delay > SEND_DELAY_MAX) { > > + pr_err("delay value should be not greater then %d\n", SEND_DELAY_MAX); > > + return -EINVAL; > > Note this is at a later point in time than before, are you sure this is > ok?
Yes, it doesn't matter when we check the module parameter.
If it's writable we even have more flexibility of changing it at runtime (when built-in the kernel) after this patch.
> > + } > > + > > if (attached) { > > /* we already have a port */ > > return; > > @@ -223,6 +226,8 @@ static void parport_detach(struct parport *port) > > hrtimer_cancel(&device.timer); > > parport_release(device.pardev); > > parport_unregister_device(device.pardev); > > + > > + pr_info("hrtimer avg error is %ldns\n", hrtimer_error); > > Why is this line needed? When drivers work properly, they are quiet. > > I know the existing code has it, no reason it needs to stay here, that's > why we created these macros, to remove the ability for drivers to be > printing junk like this that they do not need to be printing.
I believe it may be useful for some debugging / statistics. But let's ask Alexander about this.
-- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
| |