| Message ID | 20220607094752.1029295-6-dario.binacchi@amarulasolutions.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series |
|
| Related | show |
On 07.06.22 11:47, Dario Binacchi wrote: > Since slcan_devs array contains the addresses of the created devices, I > think it is more natural to use its address to remove it from the list. > It is not necessary to store the index of the array that points to the > device in the driver's private data. IMO this patch should not be part of the slcan enhancement series. I can see the "miss-use" of dev->base_addr but when we change this code we should also take care of a similar handling in drivers/net/slip/slip.c Therefore a change like this should be done in slcan.c and slip.c simultaneously with a single patch. Best regards, Oliver > > Signed-off-by: Dario Binacchi <dario.binacchi@amarulasolutions.com> > --- > > drivers/net/can/slcan.c | 15 ++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/can/slcan.c b/drivers/net/can/slcan.c > index 956b47bd40a7..4df0455e11a2 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/can/slcan.c > +++ b/drivers/net/can/slcan.c > @@ -428,11 +428,17 @@ static int slc_open(struct net_device *dev) > > static void slc_dealloc(struct slcan *sl) > { > - int i = sl->dev->base_addr; > + unsigned int i; > > - free_candev(sl->dev); > - if (slcan_devs) > - slcan_devs[i] = NULL; > + for (i = 0; i < maxdev; i++) { > + if (sl->dev == slcan_devs[i]) { > + free_candev(sl->dev); > + slcan_devs[i] = NULL; > + return; > + } > + } > + > + pr_err("slcan: can't free %s resources\n", sl->dev->name); > } > > static int slcan_change_mtu(struct net_device *dev, int new_mtu) > @@ -529,7 +535,6 @@ static struct slcan *slc_alloc(void) > > snprintf(dev->name, sizeof(dev->name), "slcan%d", i); > dev->netdev_ops = &slc_netdev_ops; > - dev->base_addr = i; > sl = netdev_priv(dev); > > /* Initialize channel control data */ >
diff --git a/drivers/net/can/slcan.c b/drivers/net/can/slcan.c index 956b47bd40a7..4df0455e11a2 100644 --- a/drivers/net/can/slcan.c +++ b/drivers/net/can/slcan.c @@ -428,11 +428,17 @@ static int slc_open(struct net_device *dev) static void slc_dealloc(struct slcan *sl) { - int i = sl->dev->base_addr; + unsigned int i; - free_candev(sl->dev); - if (slcan_devs) - slcan_devs[i] = NULL; + for (i = 0; i < maxdev; i++) { + if (sl->dev == slcan_devs[i]) { + free_candev(sl->dev); + slcan_devs[i] = NULL; + return; + } + } + + pr_err("slcan: can't free %s resources\n", sl->dev->name); } static int slcan_change_mtu(struct net_device *dev, int new_mtu) @@ -529,7 +535,6 @@ static struct slcan *slc_alloc(void) snprintf(dev->name, sizeof(dev->name), "slcan%d", i); dev->netdev_ops = &slc_netdev_ops; - dev->base_addr = i; sl = netdev_priv(dev); /* Initialize channel control data */
Since slcan_devs array contains the addresses of the created devices, I think it is more natural to use its address to remove it from the list. It is not necessary to store the index of the array that points to the device in the driver's private data. Signed-off-by: Dario Binacchi <dario.binacchi@amarulasolutions.com> --- drivers/net/can/slcan.c | 15 ++++++++++----- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)