Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934284Ab3CZNdd (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:33:33 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([143.182.124.37]:9930 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934130Ab3CZNdc (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Mar 2013 09:33:32 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,911,1355126400"; d="scan'208";a="276119448" Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:33:26 +0100 From: Samuel Ortiz To: Greg KH Cc: Tomas Winkler , arnd@arndb.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [char-misc-next 01/11 V4] mei: bus: Initial MEI Client bus type implementation Message-ID: <20130326133326.GA19511@zurbaran> References: <1363819469-696-1-git-send-email-tomas.winkler@intel.com> <1363819469-696-2-git-send-email-tomas.winkler@intel.com> <20130325202855.GA21494@kroah.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130325202855.GA21494@kroah.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3687 Lines: 110 Hi Greg, On Mon, Mar 25, 2013 at 01:28:55PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:44:19AM +0200, Tomas Winkler wrote: > > create mode 100644 Documentation/misc-devices/mei/mei-client-bus.txt > > Shouldn't you also create Documentation/ABI/ entries as well? You mean for the bus specific stuff or for the /dev/mei entry ? For the bus parts, we're not adding any MEI specific sysfs entries. What should we document ? > > +#define NFC_UUID UUID_LE(0x0bb17a78, 0x2a8e, 0x4c50, 0x94, \ > > + 0xd4, 0x50, 0x26, 0x67, 0x23, 0x77, 0x5c) > > + > > +static struct mei_cl_id contact_mei_cl_tbl[] = { > > + { CONTACT_DRIVER_NAME, NFC_UUID }, > > + > > + /* required last entry */ > > + { } > > +}; > > What about MODULE_DEVICE() functionality for this structure? Don't you > need/want that as well? I was planning to do that as a separate mod_devicetable.h patch once this code gets merged, but I guess it makes sense to include it with this patchset. It reminds me that I should remove the uuid_le field from the mei_cl_id structure, it's useless. > > +/** > > + * struct mei_cl_device - MEI device handle > > + * An mei_cl_device pointer is returned from mei_add_device() > > + * and links MEI bus clients to their actual ME host client pointer. > > + * Drivers for MEI devices will get an mei_cl_device pointer > > + * when being probed and shall use it for doing ME bus I/O. > > + * > > + * @dev: linux driver model device pointer > > + * @uuid: me client uuid > > + * @cl: mei client > > + * @priv_data: client private data > > + */ > > +struct mei_cl_device { > > + struct device dev; > > + > > + uuid_le uuid; > > + struct mei_cl *cl; > > + > > + void *priv_data; > > +}; > > Why is priv_data needed? What's wrong with the pointer provided to you > in struct device? mei_cl_device->dev->p->driver_data is used by mei drivers to carry their private data around, we define mei_cl_get_clientdata/mei_cl_set_clientdata for that and keep the mei_cl_device structure opaque to them. mei_cl_device->priv_data is used internally by the drivers/misc/mei/ bus related code to carry technology specific pointers. drivers/misc/mei/nfc.c uses it to fetch its private data when it gets a mei_cl_device pointer. > > + * > > + * Contact Information: > > + * Intel Corporation. > > + * linux-mei@linux.intel.com > > + * http://www.intel.com > > + * > > + * BSD LICENSE > > Wait, you are putting code that has EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL() usage under a > GPL/BSD license? I need an Intel lawyer signed-off-by: on the patch > before I can accept that. Sorry about that. We changed our EXPORT_SYMBOL to EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL when you asked for it, and I missed changing this header file at the same time. I will actually remove the licensing terms from this file. > > +struct mei_cl_driver { > > + struct device_driver driver; > > + const char *name; > > What's wrong with the driver.name field? >From your initial comments on patchset v1: " > +static struct mei_bus_driver contact_driver = { > + .driver = { > + .name = CONTAC_DRIVER_NAME, > + }, Can't you put a name field in your mei_bus_driver structure and then copy it to the version in the driver model? That's what other bus drivers do and it makes more sense. " And you were right, that is indeed what other bus drivers do. Did I misunderstand you here ? Cheers, Samuel. -- Intel Open Source Technology Centre http://oss.intel.com/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/