Messages in this thread | | | From | "Rafael J. Wysocki" <> | Date | Fri, 24 Mar 2023 14:24:12 +0100 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 4/5] thermal/core: Enforce paired .bind/.unbind callbacks |
| |
On Fri, Mar 24, 2023 at 8:08 AM Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> wrote: > > The .bind/.unbind callbacks are designed to allow the thermal zone > device to bind to/unbind from a matched cooling device, with thermal > instances created/deleted. > > In this sense, .bind/.unbind callbacks must exist in pairs. > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com> > --- > drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c | 5 +++++ > 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c > index 5225d65fb0e0..9c447f22cb39 100644 > --- a/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c > +++ b/drivers/thermal/thermal_core.c > @@ -1258,6 +1258,11 @@ thermal_zone_device_register_with_trips(const char *type, struct thermal_trip *t > if (num_trips > 0 && (!ops->get_trip_type || !ops->get_trip_temp) && !trips) > return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > > + if ((ops->bind && !ops->unbind) || (!ops->bind && ops->unbind)) {
This can be written as
if (!!ops->bind != !!ops->unbind) {
> + pr_err("Thermal zone device .bind/.unbind not paired\n");
And surely none of the existing drivers do that? Because it would be a functional regression if they did.
> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL); > + } > + > if (!thermal_class) > return ERR_PTR(-ENODEV); > > --
| |