lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 2/3] scsi: ufs: Modulize ufs-bsg
From
Date
On 12/17/19 12:56 AM, cang@codeaurora.org wrote:
> Even in the current ufs_bsg.c, it creates two devices, one is ufs-bsg,
> one is the char dev node under /dev/bsg. Why this becomes a problem
> after make it a module?
>
> I took a look into the pci_driver, it is no different than making ufs-bsg
> a plain device. The only special place about pci_driver is that it has its
> own probe() and remove(), and the probe() in its bus_type calls the
> probe() in pci_driver. Meaning the bus->probe() is an intermediate call
> used to pass whatever needed by pci_driver->probe().
>
> Of course we can also do this, but isn't it too much for ufs-bsg?
> For our case, calling set_dev_drvdata(bsg_dev, hba) to pass hba to
> ufs_bsg.c would be enough.
>
> If you take a look at the V3 patch, the change makes the ufs_bsg.c
> much conciser. platform_device_register_data() does everything for us,
> initialize the device, set device name, provide the match func,
> bus type and release func.
>
> Since ufs-bsg is somewhat not a platform device, we can still add it
> as a plain device, just need a few more lines to get it initialized.
> This allows us leverage kernel's device driver model. Just like Greg
> commented, we don't need to re-implement the mechanism again.

Hi Can,

Since ufs-bsg is not a platform device I think it would be wrong to
model ufs-bsg devices as platform devices.

Please have a look at the bus_register() and bus_unregister() functions
as Greg KH asked. Using the bus abstraction is not that hard. An example
is e.g. available in the scsi_debug driver, namely the pseudo_lld_bus.

Thanks,

Bart.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-12-17 19:20    [W:0.053 / U:6.480 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site